men involved with domestic violence

[Lil devils x_v1legacy]

instead they are being blamed for not doing it all for them. The men have to step up so that feminist CAN give them a hand, not just sit back and complain that they didn't do all the work for them.

It's not blaming. Just pointing out that feminism doesn't really help men.

If you understand what patriarchy is, you would understand that is a prime example of the consequences of it.

A catch all word that has no real meaning?

edit:

A bit too facetious. My point was that in the first half of the video you see women rising up over the "patriarchy" that promotes men having power over women, by standing up to the man, and protecting the woman, but no one whatsoever stood up for the man.

What does it say about those who will fight the patriarchy for womens rights but not mens? Is it really just the "Patriarchy" that's the problem?

The first half of the video shows no such thing. Women rising up does not mean " women rising up in violence", that is not "rising up" at all, "rising up" means to be better than violence, not participate in it. Women can take part in and condone Patriarchy as much as men can. Patriarchy most definitely has meaning.

Not having adequate resources or enough men willing to participate does not show that feminism isn't helping men. Men have to get up and help themselves so women CAN help them otherwise there is nothing to "help" men with. If men are not bothered enough to volunteer, how can women help them make a successful program? Feminism can be and IS very beneficial to men if men allow it to be. Feminism encourages men to step away from patriarchy and not be afraid to ask for help. By seeing macho and patriarchy for what it is, and the consequences of it you can also help society progress forward to move past it to become a post patriarchal society where men and women are equal and it is not a bad thing to be " girly" or "womanly", it is okay for men to ask for help and they are no less " manly" for it, instead it is just a part of being "human".

 

[generals3]

If you understand what patriarchy is, you would understand that is a prime example of the consequences of it. Under Patriarchy, men are not supposed to be weak, so of course no one is going to help him "He is a man". Under Patriarchy, it matters not what the woman does because the man is always stronger, tougher and the woman poses no threat so no one will help him.

Wrong. In a real patriarchy such a thing would never happen. Because in an actual patriarchy a woman who even dares to lay a hand on her partner/husband would be severely punished.

 

[Lil devils x_v1legacy]

If you understand what patriarchy is, you would understand that is a prime example of the consequences of it. Under Patriarchy, men are not supposed to be weak, so of course no one is going to help him "He is a man". Under Patriarchy, it matters not what the woman does because the man is always stronger, tougher and the woman poses no threat so no one will help him.

Wrong. In a real patriarchy such a thing would never happen. Because in an actual patriarchy a woman who even dares to lay a hand on her partner/husband would be severely punished.

Of course in a "full Patriarchy" women would be beaten/stoned/ killed for such actions against a man, however, luckily western society has progressed quite far from that and hopefully is in the "death throws" at the end of Patriarchy. Although, society may never recover fully from the effects of Patriarchy, we can hope it becomes the " barbaric past" we wish to have no part of sooner rather than later.

Under patriarchy, women are also portrayed as being too weak to be a real threat to a man, they are considered inferior, so there is no sympathy for a man who could not handle his inferior woman. Failure to keep your woman in her place would make a man appear weak and cause embarrassment to him instead. Yes, the man would punish the woman, but if he failed to do so he would be humiliated.

 

[Thyunda]

Why wasn't he in danger?

The worst thing that happened to him was the equivalent of someone bumping into him in a crowded area and even then he could have shut it down if he wanted to do so. Let me know when they release the footage of her doing something significantly worse than slightly displacing him.

Hey, maybe he lives 92 miles away from the nearest family member or friend and can't actually afford to leave, given that she paid for most of his possessions and he'll lose them on his departure.

Maybe he should have sold his Adventure Time memorabilia on eBay and bought a bus ticket to home, or gotten a job, or did something, anything, to help himself?

Maybe he feels pressured to stay and that he's with a girl he doesn't deserve and so he should be grateful she's even with him, and that a real man can handle the beatings. Maybe it looks consensual, but maybe he's just too trodden on to get back up.

If he can handle the beatings then it isn't a problem; if he values whatever he thinks is so special about her over his well-being then there isn't a problem. If he's too trodden to get back up then what difference does it make?

Maybe he can't get a job and that's why he's reliant on her? Some people can't go home, y'know. Some people were forced to leave in the first place.
Anything she did to him in the video was the exact equivalent of what he did to her. You saw how people reacted to him doing it to her, so why is it any different that she does the same to him?

Look, I'll put this in simple terms because you apparently haven't been outside in the past ten years. It is not okay to physically abuse anybody. It is never the victim's fault. If you hit somebody, it doesn't make them responsible just because they didn't knock you out in response, it just makes you an opportunistic twat. Is that clear enough for you?

 

[Thaluikhain]

What does it say about those who will fight the patriarchy for womens rights but not mens? Is it really just the "Patriarchy" that's the problem?

You're assuming that men defending women isn't part of the patriarchy. Women being lesser, and thus requiring men to defend them is a big part of the patriarchy.

Taking your point more generally, though, yes, it's a big problem. People tend to be a lot more interested in having their rights fought for, than others. It's not so much an issue of feminism being there to support women at the expense of men, but that it's often an issue of feminism being run by women who are white, straight middle class cis able-bodied and so on, at the expense of women who aren't.

Dismantling the patriarchy benefits everyone, no matter what their gender. Using, for example, racism while doing so, only benefits a given value of "everyone".

 

[generals3]

Of course in a "full Patriarchy" women would be beaten/stoned/ killed for such actions against a man, however, luckily western society has progressed quite far from that and hopefully is in the "death throws" at the end of Patriarchy. Although, society may never recover fully from the effects of Patriarchy, we can hope it becomes the " barbaric past" we wish to have no part of sooner rather than later.

Under patriarchy, women are also portrayed as being too weak to be a real threat to a man, they are considered inferior, so there is no sympathy for a man who could not handle his inferior woman. Failure to keep your woman in her place would make a man appear weak and cause embarrassment to him instead. Yes, the man would punish the woman, but if he failed to do so he would be humiliated.

Yes he may have been humiliated but the twisted side of the current situation in a western society is that men are both expected to be able to handle such scenarios but aren't allowed to. And the reason for this is because we live in an age where the patriarchy has been destroyed (in the western world) but those who destroyed it for some reason claims it's still existing and they're continuously implanting that idea into people. So people continue in believing men are supposed to handle such situations (a consequence of the lies perpetuated regarding the existence of the patriarchy) but simply cannot (because the patriarchy is actually destroyed). How can we say anything close to a patriarchy even remains in a day and age where a man cannot even use legal self defence against a female partner? (because this is the current sad state of affairs)

 

[NeutralDrow]

How can we say anything close to a patriarchy even remains in a day and age where a man cannot even use legal self defence against a female partner?

Because that is absolutely a patriarchal attitude (for reasons that have already been mentioned, regarding men being "tainted" with associations of lesser, womanly behavior), and because domestic violence is only one small aspect of patriarchy that takes place alongside lower economic power, uneven societal pressures regarding sex and modesty, rape culture, and the continuing political influence of (often religious, but not always) organizations that are outright anti-woman.

You need to recognize the source if you want to enact a working solution.

 

[Thaluikhain]

How can we say anything close to a patriarchy even remains in a day and age where a man cannot even use legal self defence against a female partner?

Because he's not supposed to need to.

The patriarchy wasn't developed by a bunch of guys sitting down to make society better for themselves, it's a set of attitudes and beliefs that came about over centuries, based on the idea of male superiority.

Being (supposedly) inherently inferior, women aren't supposed to be able to threaten men. Men can't defend themselves, because a "real" man has nothing to defend himself against.

That this completely fails to reflect the reality of the situation is one of the problems with the patriarchy.

 

[DevilWithaHalo]

If you understand what patriarchy is, you would understand that is a prime example of the consequences of it.

A catch all word that has no real meaning?

That's more or less my take on the useless theoretical concept. I was once told by a woman in a store who asked for my help that she did so because I looked like I knew what I was doing. Patriarchy. I once assisted a woman install new wiper blades in her car outside a store because she was obviously having trouble figuring it out on her own. Patriarchy. I was told that long hair on a guy was a turn off. Patriarchy. I read a brief article yesterday about how Bike Helmet laws were sexist because they created bad hair days for women. Patriarchy. Me typing this nonsense(although all true) with haughty derision? Patriarchy. My denial of Patriarchy? Patriarchy.

You can't dismantle something that doesn't exist.

 

[Schadrach]

snip

One of the rare cases where AVfM actually makes a valid point, it gives a demonstration of how research gets twisted aroun to show what the underlying ideology of the researchers wants it to, without anyone technically lying.

http://www.avoiceformen.com/men/boys/misandry-in-psychology-teen-violence/

Straus (the same Straus who along with Steinmetz and Gelles seriously injured their careers by coming to the conclusion that men are victims of domestic violence, too) actually categorized the most common techniques used into 7 general methods by which male victims and female perpetrators of domestic violence are minimized in research [footnote]http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2/V74-gender-symmetry-with-gramham-Kevan-Method%208-.pdf[/footnote], including things like simply not asking questions you might not like the answer to, concluding that evidence supports your belief whether or not there's anything to back it, only citing sources that support a specific ideological goal, and of course

Spoiler: creating evidence by citation

 

[WeepingAngels]

If you understand what patriarchy is, you would understand that is a prime example of the consequences of it.

A catch all word that has no real meaning?

That's more or less my take on the useless theoretical concept. I was once told by a woman in a store who asked for my help that she did so because I looked like I knew what I was doing. Patriarchy. I once assisted a woman install new wiper blades in her car outside a store because she was obviously having trouble figuring it out on her own. Patriarchy. I was told that long hair on a guy was a turn off. Patriarchy. I read a brief article yesterday about how Bike Helmet laws were sexist because they created bad hair days for women. Patriarchy. Me typing this nonsense(although all true) with haughty derision? Patriarchy. My denial of Patriarchy? Patriarchy.

You can't dismantle something that doesn't exist.

Patriarchy is the feminist scapegoat. When men could defend themselves against a violent women, that was patriarchy at work and now that men can't defend themselves without running the risk of being arrested under DV Laws, that's patriarchy too.

 

[generals3]

Because he's not supposed to need to.

The patriarchy wasn't developed by a bunch of guys sitting down to make society better for themselves, it's a set of attitudes and beliefs that came about over centuries, based on the idea of male superiority.

Being (supposedly) inherently inferior, women aren't supposed to be able to threaten men. Men can't defend themselves, because a "real" man has nothing to defend himself against.

That this completely fails to reflect the reality of the situation is one of the problems with the patriarchy.

A patriarchy is a system not a set of beliefs. There is a difference between stereotyping or holding preconceived ideas and there being a "patriarchy". And the fact this word is being so enormously misused is blatantly harmful. It is creating a false image that a patriarchy and certain beliefs/ideas are inseparable.

And ever since ancient history it is well know women can threaten men. Actually i don't think there has ever been a time when people believed they cannot. Although the means tend to be less physical. (like poisoning)

And weren't blacks one time considered inherently inferior? Yet i doubt white people who would have been abused by them would be looked down upon. You're trying to oversimplify these social interactions way too much.

 

[PeterMerkin69]

You want to fix that sentence? I know dozens of women who are just as strong if not stronger than the average male. I also know a bucket load of females who may not be stronger than men - but they are highly trained in martial arts and could kick most guys' ass.

Technically, you can't "know" comic book characters because they aren't real. Highly trained in martial arts... lol.

This primitive belief that if you are stronger than someone then you aren't a victim is fucking deplorable. It's such ridiculous logic that is somehow accepted by people like you. Try to apply your logic to other crimes.

It is true for all crimes wherein the "victims" allow themselves to be victimized. Just because something is arbitrarily defined as illegal doesn't mean the person it happens to didn't have a hand in it or couldn't have reasonably prevented it.

Legally speaking, you're totally fucking wrong. If someone reported that and the police got enough evidence to prove it happened and the victim pressed charges then action would have been taken. Restraining orders, AVOs and even punishments could and would be given out to the abuser.

You do realize that everything you just said could just as easily be applied to women as well, right?

Because grabbing someone, shoving them and yelling at them is totally okay!

It's really not that big of a deal, all things considered.

Maybe he can't get a job and that's why he's reliant on her? Some people can't go home, y'know. Some people were forced to leave in the first place.
Anything she did to him in the video was the exact equivalent of what he did to her. You saw how people reacted to him doing it to her, so why is it any different that she does the same to him?

We can make all the milquetoast excuses we want for this guy who, by now, has got to be the most ineffectual human being I have ever heard of, but at the end of the day, it's easier for men to get away from their abusers, to support themselves, or, at the very least, to defend themselves. And it's far lower risk that they'll be slain by their partners if they do.

Over half (52%) of female victims aged 16 or over had been killed by their partner...In contrast, only five per cent of male victims aged 16 or over were killed by their partner, ex-partner or lover in 2010/11

It is never the victim's fault.

This simply isn't true. We don't live in the world that should be, we live in the world that is, and when you have the option to extricate yourself from an abusive relationship but elect not to do so for reasons of vanity, or greed, or neurosis, you have no one but yourself to blame.

 

[Thaluikhain]

A patriarchy is a system not a set of beliefs.

One does not occur without the other. Social systems do not just appear out of nowhere, the form they take depends on, amongst other things, the beliefs of that society.

It is creating a false image that a patriarchy and certain beliefs/ideas are inseparable.

They are. You cannot have a male dominated society without viewing males as superior, and vice versa.

And the fact this word is being so enormously misused is blatantly harmful.

Define "misused". Yes, the word is used by feminists to mean something somewhat different than the original meaning of the word, but that is not to say that that is somehow wrong or harmful.

And ever since ancient history it is well know women can threaten men. Actually i don't think there has ever been a time when people believed they cannot. Although the means tend to be less physical. (like poisoning)

Certainly, I am referring to physical violence.

And weren't blacks one time considered inherently inferior? Yet i doubt white people who would have been abused by them would be looked down upon.

Because, as everyone knows, black people were/are considered inferior in a different way than women are. Which leads to various stereotypes about black women, but that's another issue.

 

[thestarlord]

ive just got out of a abusive relationship with my soon to be ex-wife. its not a easy thing to do. making the first step away is always the hardest. but once you make that step in the right direction it starts to get easier.
not straight way of course but over time.
As for the fact that the victim feels like its their fault that's a strange one. In my mind I always knew that It wasn't my fault but there is always a part of you doubting that. Telling you that you did something wrong. Its not rational but its there.
And because its there you will think that.
The charities out there are a big help. But you still need to make the step towards them and give them a call.
Its not a easy situation.
And anyone who thinks that a man being hit by a woman is weak isn't the case.

 

[Something Amyss]

Yes, the "other side." Because we need Fox News, forced "fair and balanced" reporting!

Domestic violence can happen to anyone.

To raise awareness for a particular kind of violence seems silly to me. Like raising money to cure breast cancer. Just raise money to cure cancer.

Of course, different cancers require different research and different treatment, which is actually sort of a perfect analogy as to why saying "violence is violence" is also inane. Women and men tend to become victims for different reasons, and so different issues need to be treated. Saying "violence is bad, mmmkay?" and taking a unilateral approach to it is like saying "cancer is bad, mmmkay?" and taking a unified approach. And when you have to approach, detect, and treat cancers differently, it's really "silly" to treat them all the same--especially when some are less detectable and far more lethal (woman are far more likely to be killed by their domestic partner than men are, to continue the analogy).

Granted, we're comparing one issue that's mostly biological to one that's mostly social in nature, but in both cases, a one size fits all" approach doesn't really work.

A women of around 50kg gets attacked by a much stronger man, lets say around 80kg. He has one hand at her throat and forces one hand down her pants. If she than executes the technique(I will describe it in a bit) fast and with all her might she will most likely do serious damage to his eye before he can stop her.

Remember when you said:

I know this is sort of insensitive and/or ignorant, but its still stuck in my brain.

It still kind of applies. Under optimum conditions, someone giving up 30 kilos to another person (gender really doesn't matter here, I'm just gonna say) can do significant damage. Fights often aren't optimal, especially if you're not expecting them. And let's be frank here, putting your hand around someone's throat is something to be concerned about. again, regardless of sex.

I'm very glad to see this double-standard come to light, as a guy, because abuse victims, of either gender, need a support group to help them recoup.

You mean this false "double standard" that people have been "bringing to light" for decades.

 

[generals3]

One does not occur without the other. Social systems do not just appear out of nowhere, the form they take depends on, amongst other things, the beliefs of that society.

Correct, they don't appear out of nowhere but neither is it as simple as saying "If A exists than B will occur and if B occurs than A must exist". A bomb and an explosion have quite a link but a bomb doesn't always lead to an explosion neither does an explosion mean a bomb must have been involved. And it's exactly the same here.

The current reality proves that beyond a shred of doubt. We do NOT have any semblance of a patriarchy left yet certain attitudes commonly linked with a patriarchal system still persist. We have an explosion which wasn't caused by a bomb.

They are. You cannot have a male dominated society without viewing males as superior, and vice versa.

Wrong. Egyptian society viewed women as equal but role wise it was quite close to a stereotypical patriarchy with men usually holding the power and being the ones doing the physical tasks.

Define "misused". Yes, the word is used by feminists to mean something somewhat different than the original meaning of the word, but that is not to say that that is somehow wrong or harmful.

It is harmful and wrong because it twists reality. And calling for activism against something that is simply not real cannot lead to any good (unless by pure chance, but based on the current state of affairs we don't have this "chance").

Because, as everyone knows, black people were/are considered inferior in a different way than women are. Which leads to various stereotypes about black women, but that's another issue.

You're the one who used the generic "inferior" term. Actually something that also needs to stop. Saying women were seen as "inferior" is not true. Yes they were seen as inferior in certain aspects but so many men scarified their lives to protect them throughout history, they couldn't have been seen as simply "inferior". Humans tend to look down upon inferior beings, and we most definitely don't tend to put our lives on the line for such beings.

 

[Thaluikhain]

The current reality proves that beyond a shred of doubt. We do NOT have any semblance of a patriarchy left yet certain attitudes commonly linked with a patriarchal system still persist. We have an explosion which wasn't caused by a bomb.

Your reality, perhaps, not necessarily everyone else's. The patriarchy is very much a real thing that affects people across the globe. You can choose not to pay attention to it, but you can't expect everyone else to ignore it.

Wrong. Egyptian society viewed women as equal but role wise it was quite close to a stereotypical patriarchy with men usually holding the power and being the ones doing the physical tasks.

In which case it wasn't equal. You can have equality, or you can view one group as superior at doing various things. You simply cannot have both. It might be more equal than other, similar systems, certainly, but you can't have equality unless all groups are viewed as equals.

 

[Chris Tian]

A women of around 50kg gets attacked by a much stronger man, lets say around 80kg. He has one hand at her throat and forces one hand down her pants. If she than executes the technique(I will describe it in a bit) fast and with all her might she will most likely do serious damage to his eye before he can stop her.

Remember when you said:

I know this is sort of insensitive and/or ignorant, but its still stuck in my brain.

It still kind of applies. Under optimum conditions, someone giving up 30 kilos to another person (gender really doesn't matter here, I'm just gonna say) can do significant damage. Fights often aren't optimal, especially if you're not expecting them. And let's be frank here, putting your hand around someone's throat is something to be concerned about. again, regardless of sex.

I'm not entirely sure what you are saying. That I shouldn't have made the gender destinction in my scenario?

The technique described is a situational follow-up thats why I specified that it is the second I teach, but scenarios like the one described, in which the attackers hands are tied with sort of control grabs, are more common for female victims. The frontal choke with one hand is actually very ineffective and not something you have to get rid of immideatly, it leaves you quite alot of time befor it threatens your oxygen level in the brain.

 

[generals3]

Your reality, perhaps, not necessarily everyone else's. The patriarchy is very much a real thing that affects people across the globe. You can choose not to pay attention to it, but you can't expect everyone else to ignore it.

In the world there are places. But I specifically mentioned "in the western world" in the beginning of this discussion. Now granted things do differ among countries a bit so it may still have been quite an overstatement. But generally speaking in the western world you'll either have no patriarchy or sad excuses of patriarchies that aren't even remotely close to actual full fledged patriarchies.

And seeing how we often discuss activism and actions undertaken in said countries i don't see how what happens in let's say Pakistan is of any relevance. I welcome you or anyone else to go fight for women's right there and complain about the patriarchy there. (I myself also find those systems quite appalling)

In which case it wasn't equal. You can have equality, or you can view one group as superior at doing various things. You simply cannot have both. It might be more equal than other, similar systems, certainly, but you can't have equality unless all groups are viewed as equals.

The point was that they were valued equally, they weren't seen as being "inferior". Off course it is possible to be valued equally but considered to be better or worse at certain things.

Because that is absolutely a patriarchal attitude (for reasons that have already been mentioned, regarding men being "tainted" with associations of lesser, womanly behavior), and because domestic violence is only one small aspect of patriarchy that takes place alongside lower economic power, uneven societal pressures regarding sex and modesty, rape culture, and the continuing political influence of (often religious, but not always) organizations that are outright anti-woman.

You need to recognize the source if you want to enact a working solution.

I seem to have overlooked your post. And no it's not a patriarchal behavior at all. A patriarchy is a system in which men dominate over women. People who are underlings are rarely allowed to fight against their "superiors" and consequently this kind of event wouldn't happen. In a patriarchy a man would probably be allowed to use disproportionate violence against his partner to assert his dominance. I have yet to hear about a society were the "superior" class is not even allowed to defend themselves against the lower ones. So saying men not being allowed to defend themselves against women is "patriarchal" is quite absurd, in a patriarchy it would be women who wouldn't be allowed to defend themselves.

And those other things are not necessarily patriarchal either. Take sex for instance, what's patriarchal about that? What's patriarchal about men being shamed for not having enough sex and women for having too much? Trying to frame every single inequality under "patriarchy" is quite questionable. (And I also think that the whole "rape culture" thing is extremely overblown). And there are political influences which try to push for anti women things, but so what? You have anti-semitic political influences, anti-rich political influences, etc. That doesn't mean the system in its entirety is anti anything.

So yeah, we do indeed need to recognize the source to find a solution. Which is why i consider this whole patriarchy debacle to be harmful.