male victims of domestic violence, how many?
Thu, 2003-10-09 20:34
#1
male victims of domestic violence, how many?
Thu, 2003-10-09 20:34
#2
I have a question for the group:
What percent of the victims of domestic violence do you think are male? What percent of the services avaiable are open to male victims?
Thanks
Thu, 2003-10-09 21:05
#3
If this is about males, why is it in the feminism forum?
Thu, 2003-10-09 21:13
#4
I am curious what feminists think about this issue. Not being one myself I am here asking.
Thu, 2003-10-09 21:22
#5
If you'd look around here a bit, you would see that this forum is specifically for the discussion of "feminist issues from a pro-feminist viewpoint". There are lots of other forums in which you can post subjects of general interest. And you might get a broader range of views on a subject like this. You do want a broad range of discussion on this issue, don't you?
Thu, 2003-10-09 21:32
#6
Actually I am simply interested to hear what someone who self-identifies as a feminist would think about this issue. I read a newspaper article recently that shocked me. It offered one side of things. I am looking to hear the other side.
If you prefer not to respond then so be it.
Thu, 2003-10-09 21:32
#7
Welcome to babble, beansrice.
Your first two posts are kind of confusing. First of all you ask for statistics and resources. Babblers are usually a helpful bunch, but it is considered rude to ask everyone to do your research when it seems like you haven't tried to find out the information yourself.
In your second post, as a way to explain your question, you state you want to hear feminists' views on the issue. So which is is, do you want data or do you want a discussion on the issues? If you want a discussion, it helps if you write a longer post where you pose some specific questions and outlining your thoughts on the issue.
New babblers who ask loaded questions in their first post are often dismissed as trolls -- that's not what you want is it? To get an idea of what the general atmoshpere is around here, I'd
suggest reading this thread: [url=http://www.rabble.ca/babble/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=15&t=000263&p... FAQ[/url]
By the way, on Babble's front page you'll see the Feminism forum has the following description: Discuss feminist issues from a pro-feminist point of view.
If that doesn't describe your point of view, you'd be better to put your threads in other forums which are open to all points of view.
As you can see from the recent threads in this forum, trolls seem to pay special attention to this forum, so us feminists have become very protective of our little piece of cyberspace.
Thu, 2003-10-09 21:38
#8
beansrice, I'm sure some babblers would be interested in discussing the issue, but you're not giving much info for us to go on. What article are you talking about? What did it say? Why were you shocked?
babble discussions are not very useful if they're held in a vacuum.
Thu, 2003-10-09 21:41
#9
quote:
Originally posted by beansnrice:
I read a newspaper article recently that shocked me. It offered one side of things. I am looking to hear the other side.
If you're serious, I'd suggest you go in to the News forum and start a thread. Include a link to the article or, if none is available, supply some of the factual content so we know what you're talking about. So far, you haven't given us much to go on.
On edit: Yeah, what Sara said. [img]biggrin.gif" border="0[/img]
[ 09 October 2003: Message edited by: Slim ]
Thu, 2003-10-09 21:46
#10
[img]biggrin.gif" border="0[/img]
I think we need a title..
Slim and Sara: the Feminism Forum Protectors
Thu, 2003-10-09 21:50
#11
The article was in a small local newspaper and featured a man who was attacked repeatedly by his wife. When this man tried contacting the domestic violence shelter he was told that they would accept only women! The bottom line is that there were no services available for him according to the article. It went on to say that the U.S. Justice department (I have since verified this) estimated that there are over 835,000 men yearly who are victims of domestic violence and 1.5 million women. That puts the percentage of males at about 36% or so. The article said that men comprised between 30% and 50% of the victims but had almost no services available. They talked about the majority of research in the past 30 years showing that WOMEN initiated more than 50% of the domestic violence. These are all things that were shocking to me and I hope to you also.
Comments?
Thu, 2003-10-09 21:57
#12
Men are free to start their own shelters. What are you doing about that?
Thu, 2003-10-09 22:15
#13
beansnrice:
Judging from some of the numbers you've supplied I suspect you're referring to a survey done in 1998 by the Department of Justice and the Centres for Disease Prevention and Control. The results are available [url=http://www.batteredmen.com/nvawsurv.pdf]here[/url] in pdf format. The survey questioned 8,000 men and 8,000 women and then extrapolated to arrive at the figures you quoted of 1.5 million female victims and 835,000 male victims. But that report offers no support that I can see for your contention that more than 50% of domestic violence is initiated by women. In fact it noted that very often male victims are assaulted and raped by other males, not by their female partners.
Obviously if male victims have no place to turn then there's a problem. But are you suggesting that's the fault of the feminists on babble? As Michelle asked, what are you doing about it?
Thu, 2003-10-09 22:15
#14
Hey, beansnrice, you're catching on quick!!
(You'll get a gold star if you cite links to backup your statistics)
I don't know where you got your statistitics, but [url=http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/ipv01.pdf]what I found on the US department of Justice website[/url], shows that of almost 700,000 cases of domestic violence in 2001, just over 100,000 of the victims were male. That means about 15% of US domestic violence victims are male. I wonder if the Canadian statistics are any different?
Regardless of the numbers and the sex of the victims, domestic violence is a terrible crime and all the feminists I know would agree.
It would be insteresting to see the results of studies of these statistics. I am willing to venture that a great proportion of the female perpetrators of domestic violence were acting in self-defense.
As for the services available for male victims, I completely agree with policies that forbid men from staying at women's shelters. If the women feel they want a woman only space to recover from the violence then power to them.
Men should look at the histories of the Shelter mouvement and see that it was started by women reaching out to other women, not through some benevolence of the govenrment. If some men want to start a shelter for men victims of abuse, then power to them!
[ 09 October 2003: Message edited by: Sara Mayo ]
Thu, 2003-10-09 22:24
#15
quote:
Originally posted by beansnrice:
[b]The article was in a small local newspaper and featured a man who was attacked repeatedly by his wife. When this man tried contacting the domestic violence shelter he was told that they would accept only women! The bottom line is that there were no services available for him according to the article. ?[/b]
That unfortunately happens a fair bit. Men are badly underserved in this area. Most often though, male victims of domestic violence or abuse, whether gay or straight, don't report what happened at all because, either, as you mentioned, there's nobody there to help them or because they'll get told to suck it up and not be such a wuss. Similar in uselessness to the things women in that situation were told before they organized and got things changed.
I'm not so sure that playing numbers games helps - regardless of who abuses more or inflicts more injuries both men and women (even despite the hard-won expansion in those services over the past 30 years) need more access to help for abuse and domestic violence.
Thu, 2003-10-09 22:26
#16
First of all, this probably belongs in the Body and Soul Forum, but that isn't my call. Also, if we appear a bit defensive, it's because we've had a few immature types through here recently engaging in a lot of rather juvenile posturing. No big deal really, when you have a popular discussion board I guess you're going to attract a few flakey types.
In dealing with your question, the trouble is that such statistics always end up comparing apples and oranges. Without addressing the specific stats you quote, I have seen similar studies which are often touted by anti-women mens groups. What they do is lower the bar to include such things as shoving, or hitting and scratching while engaged in self defence. Where there is more serious abuse of men by women in domestic situations is in a situation where there have been decades of abuse, and now the male is older and the power balance has shifted. I in no way condone this even if it is rare. I have some legitimate studies that deal with this. If you're still around later, and interested I can dig them up.
In the matter of resources available, I cannot think of any shelter dedicated as being for male victims of domestic violence. This would be for a couple of reasons. First, there are shelters for men who find themselves on the street, and also ones specifically dedicated to people in some psycho-social crisis, and are able to deal with these issues which you describe. There are also community based crisis response services that can help with such issues in the home, and are gender neutral. I used to work for one.
Now, there are specific shelters for female victims of domestic violence [b]ONLY[/b]because dedicated women fought tooth and nail, against overwhelming obstacles, tirelessly and over many decades to achieve this. They didn't get much help from men. They fought in the political arena, in the media, in their churches and too often in their homes. Women were killed and injured while politicions delayed.
Mr. Beansnrice, if you genuinely believe that this is such an important issue, and if your social conscience is as healthy as apparently your diet, you are free to take up the gauntlet yourself and do as these brave women have done. You'll have to be able to come up with stats that can withstand public scrutiny however.
Thu, 2003-10-09 22:48
#17
Michelle said:
"Men are free to start their own shelters. What are you doing about that?"
This is a surprising response. It seems to attempt to divert attention away from the topic by casting blame. In some ways it reminds me of some whites in the south in the 50's and 60's who told the blacks that if they wanted water fountains they could build their own! This is precisely the sort of response I was hoping not to hear. It simply validates the stereotype of feminists not having compassion for men.
Thu, 2003-10-09 22:55
#18
Slim - The figure of over 50% domestic violence initiated by women comes from the only meta analysis ever done on the past 30 years of domestic violence research. It is not online but was published in Psychological Bulletin, 2000 and authored by John Archer, PhD. It takes into account previous research and based on this states that women initiate the domestic violence more often then men. You can see the cite for this study and a number of other studies which report similar findings [url=http://www.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm]here. [/url]
[url=http://www.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm]http://www.csulb.edu/~mfieber...
Archer's study estimates that men comprise 38% of the seriously injured from domestic violence. He also shows that women tend to use tactics of surprise and lethal weapons more often then men in order to make up for their lack of size.
Thu, 2003-10-09 23:00
#19
quote:
Originally posted by beansnrice:
[b]Michelle said:"Men are free to start their own shelters. What are you doing about that?"
This is a surprising response. It seems to attempt to divert attention away from the topic by casting blame. In some ways it reminds me of some whites in the south in the 50's and 60's who told the blacks that if they wanted water fountains they could build their own! This is precisely the sort of response I was hoping not to hear. It simply validates the stereotype of feminists not having compassion for men.[/b]
Your comparison is pretty ridiculous, but there is a grain of wisdom in it. Blacks in the south did take matters into their own hands. Sometimes their efforts were effective, and sometimes counterproductive, but in the end they won the right to those drinking fountains on their own. A sympathetic federal government offered support but the blacks had to fight for it. What they had going for them was not only courage, but a demonstratable case.
I elaborated a bit more on what Michelle said. If the problem is as you say it is, start groups to deal with the issue of under-reporting. Get active. Build your shelters. That's how it works. Governments do not take the initiative in these matters, they need to be shown and to be pushed.
Thu, 2003-10-09 23:04
#20
Sara - What they are finding is that the justice department [i]crime[/i] figures are skewed. Men tend not to see a woman's violence toward them as "assault" and therefore when asked about whether they have been assaulted they say no. The study I was citing was done by the Violence Against Women Office which is a branch of the Justice Department. Their survey is more accurate since it is not related to crimes and the questions asked were more related to BEHAVIORS rather than crimes.
Your idea about self-defense has been long held by many folks. Most of the research tends to show that it is more a myth. If women initiate the violence over 50% of the time then it is more likely that the men would be responding in self defence don't you think?
The idea about shelters not being able to take men is also a myth. There are shelters in the U.S. which have been co-ed and very successful for years. Here's a letter from the director of that shelter:
[url=http://www.ncfmla.org/pdfdocs/commissionletters/overberg.pdf]http://www....
Of the 2000 emergency shelters now in the US on 15 will take men.
Thu, 2003-10-09 23:11
#21
Doug said:
"That unfortunately happens a fair bit. Men are badly underserved in this area. Most often though, male victims of domestic violence or abuse, whether gay or straight, don't report what happened at all because, either, as you mentioned, there's nobody there to help them or because they'll get told to suck it up and not be such a wuss. Similar in uselessness to the things women in that situation were told before they organized and got things changed."
Exactly Doug. I was working in a community mental health center in the early 70's and remember very clearly
how we worked very hard to make it safe for the women who were victims of domestic violence to feel safe enough to come into treatment. TV radio, free lunches, seeing people in beauty parlors, etc. Now we need to do the same for the men.
Thank you for your compassion for men.
Thu, 2003-10-09 23:21
#22
Oldgoat (great name btw) - The origins of the domestic violence shelters is an interesting story indeed. The first shelter was started by a woman named Erin Pizzey. Erin has written a great deal since that time and is furious with the feminists who she says: "Hijacked her movement" Erin has written extensively on the violence of women and how the domestic violence industry actually does women a disservice by assuming that only men are the perps. With that assumption violent women are denied access to the services they need. You can read more about Erin here:
[url=http://www.dvmen.org/dv-71.htm]http://www.dvmen.org/dv-71.htm[/url]
Thu, 2003-10-09 23:22
#23
Just because some shelters take men, does that mean that other shelters are obliged to do the same? Not every problem has the same solution.
And you haven't verified your 50% statistic. For all we know, you made it up.
By the way, why don't you consider yourself a feminist? Just wondering.
[ 09 October 2003: Message edited by: Jacob Two-Two ]
Thu, 2003-10-09 23:29
#24
From your article about Erin:
quote:
It was only by the direct intervention of the Queen that she was able to continue.
Have you tried going that route?
Thu, 2003-10-09 23:33
#25
Jacob - Here is a quote from the site that I had linked above:
quote:
Archer, J. (2000). Sex differences in aggression between heterosexual partners: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 651-680. (Meta-analyses of sex differences in physical aggression indicate that women were more likely than men to “use one or more acts of physical aggression and to use such acts more frequently.” In terms of injuries, women were somewhat more likely to be injured, and analyses reveal that 62% of those injured were women.)
Here's the link:
[url=http://www.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm]http://www.csulb.edu/~mfieber...
You might want to just browse through some of those and get a sense of the reseach that has been done over the last 30 years. It is consistent and shocking. Somehow the media doesn't give us this sort of message. I wonder why?
Thu, 2003-10-09 23:40
#26
Here's another interesting one Goat:
quote:
Brutz, J., & Ingoldsby, B. B. (1984). Conflict resolution in Quaker families. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 46, 21-26. (Used Conflict Tactics Scale with a sample of 288 Quakers <130 men, 158 women> and found a slightly higher rate of female to male violence <15.2%> than male to female violence <14.6%>.)
The queen and I are tight. I should ask her for some help shouldn't I? [img]biggrin.gif" border="0[/img]
Thu, 2003-10-09 23:44
#27
Don't you all find it interesting that Erin Pizzey has been brought up twice now, in two days, by two TOTALLY different people?
The coincidence is astounding.
Thu, 2003-10-09 23:54
#28
I've been following this thread still since I've been banned. I am not any of the posters other than Dan Lynch or this one.
Nobody seems to be explaining that they are other individuals who are posting as themselves.
Even though I can argue my position with valid research and relative importance to feminist issue obviously I have been banned and will respect the moderator of this thread for her decision.
If any feminists want an open discussion based on the principles I will envite you to stand your ground to open a thread or to question my assertions there. Sorry for the interruption but until the ban is lifted I will not post here as requested by the mod and that none of these posters are in fact me. Thank you for your understanding.
Thu, 2003-10-09 23:55
#29
That's the third time in the last 45 minutes I've followed a link and ended up at the J. Archer site. The trouble is that it appears to say so much yet says so little. Several dozen summaries does not equal one good study. Publications which evaluate work to date on a given subject are valuable, but useful ones are book length.
However, I'm not saying there's not good stuff there. In my first post I referred to some studies I have kicking around, and it occurs to me now that they're about 15 years old. We live in a changing world, and orthodoxy of thinking is not productive. Much for instance has been written about how violent female teens seem to have become over the years.
Comparing society's response to violence against women to the issue of violence against men by women may or may not be productive. Framing the issue as a competition for services, and that men are hard done by by feminists is very counter-productive, and will only alienate a lot of people (women) who because of their experience can be a huge help in furthering the issues of domestic violence against anyone.
Thu, 2003-10-09 23:56
#30
beansrice, now that we've answered your questions, and surprise surprise, you don't agree with us, I think its time for you to answer some of our questions:
- there are a number of claims made on the website you cited [url=http://www.dvmen.org,]http://www.dvmen.org,[/url] such as "It isn't likely that calling 911 during a crisis is the best solution a person can come up with to deal with intimate partner violence and abuse.", "We are more often frightened than hurt: Our troubles spring more often from fancy than reality.", "If you have children be aware that the woman is very likely to charge you with child abuse and sexual abuse, as well as domestic violence or abuse in a custody battle.", "As evident from previous sections in this chapter, the issue of domestic violence against women has been grossly overstated in a successful attempt to obtain funding for feminist groups. " Do you agree with theses statements?
- What makes you think that website is a credible source?
- Are you more likely to believe a website that comes from a male perspective than a female perspective? If so, take a look at this site: [url=http://www.menstoppingviolence.org/]http://www.menstoppingviolence.org/[...
- do you agree that one of the worst insults to a man is to call him a woman? If so, what do you think that means about our society views women?
Fri, 2003-10-10 00:00
#31
quote:
Now we need to do the same for the men.
Who's "we"? Generally, when people say, "we need to do something about this", what they really mean is "someone else needs to do what I think ought to be done about this".
I'm fully in support of shelters and services for men who have been abused by women. I also believe that in order to best service abused men, to best share their experience, provide them with proper support and protection from their assaulters, as well as provide them with empowering role-modelling, these services should be staffed and managed by men. Women's shelters aren't staffed by men because abused women don't often feel safe around men. The corollary would surely be true of abused men; why would they want support services from people who they identify with their abuser?
So, while women can be supportive of the cause, and no doubt many of us are, it's men who have to take the action in providing the required care. Do you know any men who are organizing to address this problem? If you could post some contact information, I know that there are many men who work in social service who would be willing to participate.
[ 10 October 2003: Message edited by: andrean ]
Fri, 2003-10-10 00:02
#32
And hey, I have another question, too. Why on EARTH would anyone want to have a discussion with someone who associates themselves with a board where shit like this appears:
quote:
oh shit. If the crap against men doesn't stop soon I may snap and go on a pyscho killing spree like my long time idol, Marc Lepine.
quote:
Someday all the Feminazi liars on this planet are going to eat every last word that vomits forth from their frothing maw. Tyrannts like Marx, Hitler, Stalin, MaoTseTung, Steinem, Dworkin, Satan, Mackinnon, Abzug, Allred, Frieden, French and all the other legions of Urukai marching forth, chanting their Kremlin-Reichstag PC Dogma all the while sealing their coffins with every syllable that stammers from their venomed snouts. They were human once, but then from the bowels of the cosmos, forces putrified by Malignant Narcicism ensnared them, enslaved them, mutilated, twisted and fused their neurology into the Dragon that is chained to the Gates of Hell. The Pit of no Return awaits them. A fate they most justly deserve!!
There's no point in engaging trolls like Lynch and his buddies from the terminallysinglecausewe'repatheticmisogynists.com bulletin boards. Even if they sound reasonable when they show up like buddy beansnrice here, don't forget that they hang around cyberboards where the above is regular spew. I suspect that's why he considers himself not to be a feminist. And I agree.
Fri, 2003-10-10 00:07
#33
Oldgoat - As you can see by the abstract the Archer study is about 30 pages long in the Psyc Bul. It is a fascinating read that I highly recommend to you. One of the more interesting aspects is the feminist criticism of the study and then Archers rebuttal. The feminists complain of his use of the Conflict Tactics Scale...Archer responds by clarifying why he thinks it is the best scale to use and by reminding them that in their research they also use the same scale! [img]eek.gif" border="0[/img] The only other criticism they level is that his research would unduly influence public policy! They are worried that if the feds find out that women are just as violent as men, or more, that they will lose funding!!!! Oh gracious.
Any good public library will have a copy of this. It is an important read.
I don't see this as a competition between men and women. I see it as a forgotten group of victims that needs services asap.
Fri, 2003-10-10 00:12
#34
beans. Are you going to anwer the questions?
Thanks!
Fri, 2003-10-10 00:14
#35
Sara - My use of that web site was close to being random. I did a quick search on google for "erin pizzey" and it was one of the links that came up. I skimmed it and it looked like a fair representative for what I have learned about Erin.
I don't endorse that site nor do I know much about it.
Fri, 2003-10-10 00:18
#36
The second quote in Michelle's post is utterly ridiculous and appears to have been written by a fifteen year old, probably between wanks.
The first quote is truly disturbing.
I'm left to wonder just why these Warren Farrell fanclubbers have found there way here, of all places.
Just like the gun-days.
Fri, 2003-10-10 00:19
#37
A good site for Erin Pizzey is Fathers for life. I can even post my speech here if you would like.
Fri, 2003-10-10 00:22
#38
Andrean - There are many out there doing good work for this cause. I would urge you to check out
[url=http://www.safe4all.org/]http://www.safe4all.org/[/url]
Also, the VAWA has public hearings where anyone wishing to testify can step forward and speak their truth.
Fri, 2003-10-10 00:23
#39
I don't know...when I googled "Erin Pizzey", her most famous quote is:
quote:
Men are gentle, honest and straightforward. Women are convoluted, deceptive and dangerous.
She doesn't sound very nice. I'm not convoluted, deceptive or dangerous and I'm a woman.
Fri, 2003-10-10 00:25
#40
Fri, 2003-10-10 00:30
#41
Sara said:
quote:
beansrice, now that we've answered your questions, and surprise surprise, you don't agree with us,
That's funny. I don't remember you even answering the first question. Maybe you can paste in the answers you gave to my questions?
nighty night
Fri, 2003-10-10 00:32
#42
In Canada, a University of Alberta study found 12 percent of husbands to be victims of violence by their wives and 11 percent of wives to be victims, but only the violence against women was published. Even when Earl Silverman, six years later, was able to get the data from an assistant who had helped prepare the original study, and then wrote it up himself, he was unable to get it published.
Similarly, another major Canadian study of dating couples found 46 percent of women vs. 18 percent of men to be physically violent. You guessed it. The 18 percent male violence was published immediately. Not only was the 46 percent female violence left unpublished, but also the authors did not acknowledge in the Canadian Journal of Sociology that their study had ever included violence against men.
When a Canadian professor found out, he requested to see the data and was refused. It was only when he exposed the refusal in his next book, combined with another three more years of pressure, that the information relating to the 46 percent female violence was released and published. By that time ('97) Canadian policy giving government support for abused women but not abused men had been entrenched, as were the bureaucracies; as were the private funding sources like United Way.
Fri, 2003-10-10 00:50
#43
quote:
Originally posted by DanMan:
[b]I have been banned and will respect the moderator of this thread for her decision.[/b]
Fri, 2003-10-10 01:48
#44
quote:
Originally posted by Dr. Mr. Ben:
[QB][/QB]
Still , being silenced un democratically on a democratic board seems kind of ironic. I made those posts primarily for canadian content since this is a canadian board.
Just trying to be helpful.
Fri, 2003-10-10 01:50
#45
Actually, the question of violence against men is one worth pursuing - as I said before, I get tetchy when anti-feminist goons try to hijack it to start this "women are evil" crap.
The largest cities in the U.S. tend to have services for battered men, usually geared for the victims of violence in gay relationships. There's a major campaign in Massachusetts along these lines - big billboards with a picture of a bruised man and the slogan, "He loves me NOT." I know San Francisco and New York have specifically dedicated shelters.
The situation for male victims of female domestic perpetrators is a bit trickier. Due to societal expectations of "manly" behavior, male victims may be even more reluctant to get help than female ones, sometimes with tragic results. Due to this fact, it's very hard to nail down accurate statistics. At the moment the picture seems to show that the phenomenon is considerably less extensive than that of male-on-female violence, but due to this underreporting, this is highly uncertain.
My mother-in-law runs a shelter, having been a victim of domestic violence herself. I asked her what provision was made for male victims. She told me they don't get that many calls, but when they do, they put the men up in hotels - they can't afford a permanent men's facility for so few cases, but they don't turn them away, either. I suspect this is fairly common practice.
Fri, 2003-10-10 03:08
#46
quote:
Originally posted by April Follies:
[b]Actually, the question of violence against men is one worth pursuing - as I said before, I get tetchy when anti-feminist goons try to hijack it to start this "women are evil" crap.
[/b]
I think this is exactly how many men feel. In Erin Pizzey's early days she comments on her life in China as it was turning communist. In her later years she regonized such a similiarity in the women's gatherings in england. She was envited to houses where such communist figures was posted on the walls: Mao, Stalin. Immediatly the women were telling her that she was oppressed and kept in servitude to her husband and that divorce was the solution.
Erin was not interested in divorcing but rather in building a network in which women could help eachother and find solutions to their problems. Erin later opened a women's shelter and fought for funding. The same communist hardcore women hijacked the shelters and starting "in-doctrinating" women with anti-male slogans and propaganda primarily trying to induce communistic ideals.
No doubt men are aprehensible to the notion, but being an anti-feminist really doesn't equate to the goon just by chance. I can show documentation after documentation along with film footage where feminists were actually the "goons". Especially when senator Ann Cools of Canada who is known for figthing for women's shelters in the original sence is now actually fighting the other way. She is fighting for men and it is feminists who have been threatening her. Now of course none of the feminists on this board would do such a thing, but what is amazing is how much of this has been kept so quiet to the public.
So for those who are asking about the earlier women who started women's shelters, they are now trying to start men's shelters and are fighting an uphill battle not with men but with feminists and the beuaracracy they dominate.
They knew the violence was a two way street and the amount of men who have lost their rights and thrown in prison without due process and void of human rights, ya, I could see them being extremely bitter about feminism on a general sence.
But people can tear down that nonsence if given the chance to openly discuss the issues. What's happened in the political arena is that politicians don't care or are afraid of losing votes if they speak up. The real changers of society is not politicians it's the people on the groundfloor. Politicians just get the credit for it.
In order to seriously reduce violence in the home we will have to objectively look at what causes the violence and why. Holding on to these power struggles is not the answer to help people it is only the answer to power.
Fri, 2003-10-10 06:33
#47
Well, assuming that we can trust Erin's testimony, why would you assume that the negative experiences she had are in any way related to modern feminism or most feminists, as you frequently imply?
Another thing that strikes me about your version of events, besides a tendency to tar every woman calling herself a feminist with the brush of a handful of (allegedly) manipulative women, is the passive, almost impotent, role men play in the whole drama. How is it that women managed to band together, fighting rigid social structures and a discriminatory culture, to create an infrastructure of support and protection for female victims of domestic abuse, while men (the more abused gender, according to you) just suffered in obscurity? They didn't form a common purpose, didn't defend their rights, only lived in fear and isolation, not knowing what to do about it. In fact, it seems, again according to you, that they couldn't even get it together to make a men's shelter until some women took pity on their helpless state and did it for them.
I find this scenario a little suspect, quite frankly. A more rational view is that women had a greater need for these programs than men did, creating a necessity for action not shared by the male community at large.
Fri, 2003-10-10 07:56
#48
Jacob said:
quote:
How is it that women managed to band together, fighting rigid social structures and a discriminatory culture, to create an infrastructure of support and protection for female victims of domestic abuse, while men (the more abused gender, according to you) just suffered in obscurity? They didn't form a common purpose, didn't defend their rights, only lived in fear and isolation, not knowing what to do about it. In fact, it seems, again according to you, that they couldn't even get it together to make a men's shelter until some women took pity on their helpless state and did it for them.
This is an excellent question and gets to the heart of the matter.
The problem is surrounded by chivalry. Men are physically and socially geared to provide and protect for women and children. When women share concerns about their safety mature men will feel responsible to do somehing. There is no facsimile for men. Men have no one who wants to insure their safety or provide for them. Chivalry is the main reason that feminism has been able to make the legislative gains that they have. Men have responded to women's cries for help.
The problem is also compounded by a man's emotional pain being taboo in our culture. No one wants to hear it much less do anything about it. Think about the number of articles you have seen having to do with female victims of domestic violence and compare that to the number you have seen about men. Make the same comparisons about depressed people. How often do you see articles about depressed men? It happens but it is very seldom. A man's pain is disregarded and preferably hidden. A woman's pain is a media event.
These two things make any efforts to obtain services for men to be an uphill battle when compared to getting services for women which is much more a downhill battle. I know. I have been involved with both.
At this point with legislation like VAWA and bill 117 in ontario the legislators need to start saying no. Instead of a Violence Against Women Act we need a Violence Against PEOPLE Act. An act that spends 5 billion dollars on people with problems not on a gender based representation of the problem. (The leading theoretical framework for DV shelters is the Duluth Model which frames the problem in terms of men being the perps and women the victims, it literally defines violence as masculine. It has no provisions for violent women...instead seeing them as violent due to men and their previous abuse)
Fri, 2003-10-10 08:05
#49
Absolutely right April. It is much more difficult to find the male victims.
April said:
quote:
The largest cities in the U.S. tend to have services for battered men, usually geared for the victims of violence in gay relationships.
I would be very curious to hear why you or anyone think this is the case? Why would it be that gay men would be funded for services while striaght men would be ignored? Just by numbers the straight victims outnumber the gays by a huge margin.
Shelter personell have been brainwashed to believe that shelters cannot admit men due to all sorts of excuses. Having worked in mental hospitals where we admitted both men and women from a variety of abusive situations I can say that both men and women found the other gender of great help in their healing. If it were blacks being denied service everyone would be up in arms. Why not over sexism?
It has been proven that co-ed shelters are effective. Not allowing men in shelters now is truly showing a lack of compassion for men. Sending them to motels is a joke and an insult. Imagine a system of 2000 hospitals for heart disease that would only take men. 5 billion dollars has been spent on these facilities. Women are instead sent to motel! Wouldn't that get you upset? Duh.
Fri, 2003-10-10 08:58
#50
quote:
Originally posted by DanMan:
[b]Still , being silenced un democratically on a democratic board seems kind of ironic. I made those posts primarily for canadian content since this is a canadian board.
Just trying to be helpful.[/b]
Democracy has nothing to do with it, nor should it. You were banned for violating the policy you agreed to when you registered.
[ 10 October 2003: Message edited by: Slim ]
Fri, 2003-10-10 09:21
#51
What policy did he break?