Poll: Biased Gender Politics and Violence

[Spoonius]

I recently read an article on domestic violence, and was a little annoyed to see that every case mentioned involved violence by a abusive husband against a defenceless wife.

It got me thinking about the way gender politics affect society's perception of violence, and led me to sites like this one [http://www.oneinthree.com.au/].

Now I've never been married, but my sister could get very violent when we were both teenagers (17-19).

One time for example, she attempted to stab me with a rusty screwdriver after we'd been mouthing off at each other. I grabbed her arm to restrain her, so she bit my wrist as hard as she could (leaving an ugly scar that's still there today).

What could I have done? Without using considerable force or hitting her back I mean (which I didn't, I just stood there like an idiot and let her bite me because I didn't know what to do).

My mum is a die-hard feminist, and used to yell at me as a little kid if I ever touched my sister even a little roughly (as kids do). Although my sister was bigger than me at the time and wasn't afraid to get physical herself, I was always the one blamed and told "never to lay hands on a girl", something I've stuck to throughout my entire life without a second thought. I've never raised a hand to anyone, not counting Krav Maga classes.

I remember sitting next to this massive girl in primary school (biggest kid in the class), and being punched randomly because "I wasn't allowed to hit her back", which she thought was a great laugh. And this creepy fucking girl I sat next to in high school who had a crush on me and used to stab my arm with sharp pencils until I bled, just for shits and giggles.

Can you imagine the uproar if our genders had been reversed? Yet the teachers tolerated it...

Women these days seem all too ready to employ violence against men, maliciously or not. Whether it's just a pinch between friends, a sharp slap after taking offence to something, or kicking a guy hard in the balls (which they often consider funny), a lot of the stuff girls get away with would be met with retaliatory violence if carried out by another guy.

We as a society are way too focused on violence against women instead of violence in general. I mean, we even have government-run "domestic violence" ads here in Australia that specifically cover violence against women, and devote their entire runtime to cases of violence carried out by trashy men. Such ads just reinforce gender inequalities.

I'm not saying that the men (or anyone) should be entitled to employ violence. But selective attitudes and mentalities are doing our society no good. A lot of it is perpetrated by feminist groups.

I disagree with feminism as a concept, it's flawed. My mother proved that. Not only is it one-sided, but the means and goals of various feminist groups are too varied and uncoordinated. They have only one unified purpose, to advance the various causes of women. Which is too vague and open to interpretation to be acceptable.

I believe in equalism. Feminism and masculism ideologies are inherently bigoted.

.
.

EDIT: Misinformation and statistics in Australia [http://www.oneinthree.com.au/misinformation/].

.
.

Btw, holy shit:

 

[Nathan Crumpler]

Fair warning, this topic comes up a lot. I hope you are prepared for people to hijack your thread.

Anyway, I've never understood why people enforce the "Men should hit women" rule. When ever I ask some one, they never give me an answer I understand. They always say "'cause women are weaker than men" and that makes sense to them.

 

[KarmaTheAlligator]

Back a few centuries, it would be unfair for men to treat women violently because they had nearly no rights. Nowadays, that concept has died long ago and we're all equal supposedly, but some people still enforce it just because that's how it's always been. Personally, I'd defend myself against anyone, male or female.

Also, from experience, the fact that men are bigger than women tend to make the men more careful.

 

[Colour Scientist]

Oh goody!
Yet another thread misunderstanding feminism.

Only one or two more threads and this week's cycle of feminism bashing should be over.

OP: Why didn't you make more of an issue out of it to your mother or your teachers? If it was genuinely bothering you why not make a stand about it, instead of blaming it on feminism?

Domestic violence is a serious problem and a lot of statistics I've seen show that it does happen more to women than men, I'm talking about serious, long term physical and emotional abuse here. Note, this is not me saying it doesn't happen to men, OF COURSE it does, it happens more than the statistics show and it does deserve more recognition.

Do you know what generally holds back the serious recognition of violence against men? The traditional gender roles of society which weren't (and I know this may come as a shock) created by fucking feminists. Men should be encouraged to come forward when something like this is bothering them and it's normally that 'boys don't cry'shit that holds them back. Most modern feminists push for female-on-male domestic violence to be more recognised and, despite what you may think, your 'die-hard feminist' mother doesn't represent every feminist in the world. If anyone on this site ever actually talks to a real feminist they'll understand that they do push for gender eqaulity, specifically fighting against the traditional gender roles and, as I just mentioned, these gender roles play a huge part in holding back the recognition of male victims of domestic violence. It's slowly changing but, as with the women's rights movement it's always an incredibly slow process. Those kinds of deep-seated ideas aren't easily shrugged off. I'm guessing your mother's at least a generation older and would have drawn her ideas from the time when the feminist movement as a whole was in its infancy, it has evolved greatly since then.

 

[MelasZepheos_v1legacy]

I recall reading a news article about domestic violence which reckoned that men were just as likely to be the victims of domestic violence as women, but were less likely to report it and less likely to be taken seriously if they did. Apparently in any verbal confrontation women are 70% more likely to strike the first physical blow.

Violence is violence and it is almost always wrong. It should be treated equally regardless of gender, and it should never be tolerated.

Anyone who has been in a fight will tell you that size and strength often don't mean much. Sure being the 6 footer with the 5'5'' wife might look like he would win in a fight, but if she's armed with something heavy, or if he's a nice guy who hates confrontation?

There are a lot of complicated issues surrounding gender politics, but it seems clear to me that there is a bias against men hitting women where no such bias exists for women.

Related aside: in English Lit we were told that you could tell a lot about the period a book was written in by looking at what wasn't said, but just assumed. Read Shakespeare and you'll find that women at the time are treated as property, even if it's never outright said. Watch movies, television, videogames and you'll see that when women hit men, it's almost never commented on, but when a man hits a woman it's a horrible crime and makes him almost certainly a villain. It's never stated that violence against women is okay, it's just accepted. And if it's accepted in the media we create, it's probably true of society as a whole.

 

[Colour Scientist]

That sounds like the "no true scotsman" fallacy to me.

I'm just saying, when it comes to the news and feminists on television it's always "men are the aggressor, females are the victim" for everything. If men are the party doing worse like in education the blame is put on men and people say that women are much better when it comes to education.

What feminists? Name one.

 

[Revnak_v1legacy]

DAMNIT OP! Why did you have to go and declare yourself an equalist? Now nothing will ever get discussed. And all our benders will be very disappointed.

Violence is violence. Even if women were on the whole very small and made of tissue paper, domestic violence carried out by them would still be wrong.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Society tells boys not to hit girls not because it's sexist against boys, but because for hundreds of years, women were seen as inferior. And because the message isn't getting through.

In Australia, something like 1 in 4 women will be sexually assaulted during their lifetime, overwhelming by men. That's something like 2.5 million women, 5 times the population of Tasmania. You go to work every day, how many women are you passing that have been, or will be, sexaully assaulted at least once during their lifetimes?

By contrast, the number of male sexual assaults is about one quarter of that, and again, it's predominantely by men.

Yes, it sucks to be told over and over again not to hit women, and that sexual assaults against men has had "much smaller" confused with "don't bother mentioning". But men are getting a much better deal.

 

[Durgiun]

If society is going to let women get away with violence against men. Fine. That's cool. Men will just have to get revenge in different ways. Theft, destruction of property, blackmail (my favourite).

 

[Woodsey]

'Women these days seem all too ready to employ violence against men, maliciously or not.'

Based on what? Your own sister who clearly has something wrong in the head (due to influence from your mother, it seems) and two whole other girls you've met during the course of your life 20-year life?

Now, there is actual evidence that there is a very large number of male victims of domestic violence each year (it hangs around the 40% mark in the UK) and yes, it is certainly under-represented, but let's not start making grandiose statements about how violent the female population is becoming based on three girls, eh?

Oh, and your Mum's a sexist, not a feminist.

 

[Colour Scientist]

Sorry but what does that have to do about my point?

All it does is open you up to the "No true scotsman" fallacy as I said before. If you disagree with them no doubt it will be "well, they aren't true feminists".

Tying that back to the OPs point.

feminist groups are too varied and uncoordinated. They have only one unified purpose, to advance the various causes of women. Which is too vague and open to interpretation to be acceptable.

I never said she wasn't a true feminist, I said majority of feminist ideals have evolved since the older generations, which they have. If you've ever read anything on feminism, you'd know that.

What it has to do with your point is you're calling me out on claiming something about a group I'm a part of and you seem to think you have more authority on the subject based on these nameless feminists you've seen on tv.

As for the OP's point, it just shows an extremely general and limited knowledge of what feminism is.

 

[Colour Scientist]

Throw a dart at any random bimbo on TV complaining that men are evil.

Since when does complaining about men being evil equate with feminism?

There's two groups of women pushing for women's rights: Women who are fighting for gender equality, which I have nothing against and support 100%, and feminists. Feminists are just bitches that think men are the cause of all problems. They don't belong to the former group and take those ideals so far to the extreme they're a detriment to society.


Was this always the case? Nope! You can thank the radicals for changing the meaning of feminist in such a way that the only thing that comes to mind when the word is heard is controlling, domineering ***** who hates Y chromosones and the bearers thereof.

So, I identify as a feminist and I want gender equality but by your broad interpretation of what feminism is I'm obviously lying to myself.

 

[FallenMessiah88]

We as a society needs to do away with gender roles or, at the very least, diminish them heavily.

 

[Eamar]

The "never lay hands on a woman" rule is bullshit. In cases of self-defence, of course a man should be able to fight back against a woman.

Personally, my main issue is the way in which women hitting men tends to be portrayed: some misguided souls view a woman slapping a man (in anger, or frustration usually) as "girl power" or "empowerment." It's not, and it should be just as unacceptable as a man hitting a woman. I mean, imagine a sit-com or movie or some such in which a woman discovers her boyfriend has been cheating on her and slaps him. It's common enough in the media, and is seen as no big deal. Now imagine if the genders were reversed. Regardless of how little physical damage the man did, that would never be accepted, and rightly so.

My point is that all (non-defensive) violence against either gender, committed by either gender should be viewed as equally unacceptable. Being a woman does not give you free rein to lash out at men any more than being a man gives you any right to "slap that *****."

I say all this as a feminist, incidentally.