Violence in Relationships Towards Women Needs To Stop

Stheno

Doublecream wrote: »

I stated that most women have done nothing to fight for women's rights, that's simply a fact. You are the one who is ill informed.

I don't know. Just speaking for myself, I was brought up in a very traditional Catholic family but always encouraged by my parents to aim for the stars.

While (and still ) aiming for those stars I was interviewed by a man on his own who read my c.v. and made a few assumptions.

His first question to me in the interview was "you're aged x (on c.v.), obviously have children (no idea how he knew this as I was 5foot8 and about 9 stone at the time) live in y commute to z, so tell me how you balance your commitments as a mother and work?"

I politely informed him I had no children.

I then got offered the job.

I informed his female HR rep that I would not take the job on the grounds of how the interview was conducted, offered to follow it up with a formal complaint, and report them, and was assured it would be dealt with.

This was less than ten years ago.

A couple of months later, I was at an industry conference and met my interviewer who was jobhunting.

Not all of us assume we have automatic rights, and some of us choose to speak out when those rights we have are violated. Indeed some continue to work to extend those rights.

Czarcasm

KomradeBishop wrote: »

Can anyone post a single good reason why groups devoted to helping women in such situations, should not devote resources to men in similar situations as well? (that includes in public awareness campaigns and such)

Makes no sense at all, to have any discrimination there.

Clue to answering your question is in bold there, and if that's not enough - it dilutes what little resources there are available to women already, so to share those resources with men and try and cater for both men and women will mean they won't be able to offer effective support to either.

Perhaps you could answer the question as to how we get more men to care for their own welfare and support each other?

It makes no sense at all to try and discredit the work done by women's support groups because they don't also support men. We should be encouraging more men to care for themselves the same way women encouraged women to care for themselves.

Shakespeare's Sister

I think Czarcasm is referring to complaints by men regarding nothing being done by society, when those men are part of society and not doing anything (and sometimes blaming feminism). Not as straightforward as that, sure, but it is one element.

Stheno

Czarcasm wrote: »

Clue to answering your question is in bold there, and if that's not enough - it dilutes what little resources there are available to women already, so to share those resources with men and try and cater for both men and women will mean they won't be able to offer effective support to either.

Perhaps you could answer the question as to how we get more men to care for their own welfare and support each other?

It makes no sense at all to try and discredit the work done by women's support groups because they don't also support men. We should be encouraging more men to care for themselves the same way women encouraged women to care for themselves.

I think a lot of this is due to the violence being inflicted by one gender upon another, it genderises (if that's even a word) the issue. Raises an interesting point about LGBT violence, is there even one charity in the country supporting victims of domestic voilence there?

I can easily see how shelters are single gender for those who are homosexual, as any threat of violence is removed due to the lack of the gender inflicting the violence in the environment, and am fairly sure there have been studies on this.

Doublecream

Czarcasm wrote: »

Clue to answering your question is in bold there, and if that's not enough - it dilutes what little resources there are available to women already, so to share those resources with men and try and cater for both men and women will mean they won't be able to offer effective support to either.

Perhaps you could answer the question as to how we get more men to care for their own welfare and support each other?

It makes no sense at all to try and discredit the work done by women's support groups because they don't also support men. We should be encouraging more men to care for themselves the same way women encouraged women to care for themselves.

The question should be how can get more PEOPLE to care for their own welfare and support each other.

If my friends need help I do my best to help them regardless of gender, gender doesn't come into it. Men and women aren't two opposing teams.

Stheno

Doublecream wrote: »

The question should be how can get more PEOPLE to care for their own welfare and support each other.

If my friends need help I do my best to help them regardless of gender, gender doesn't come into it. Men and women aren't two opposing teams.

I think it's more how do you destigmatise domestic violence full stop.

I suffered from it, and the shame I felt stopped me asking for help, and apparently that's common.

When I did, the help was there in abundance from family and friends.

It's a bit like mental illness in a way

KomradeBishop

Shakespeare's Sister wrote: »

I think Czarcasm is referring to complaints by men regarding nothing being done by society, when those men are part of society and not doing anything (and sometimes blaming feminism). Not as straightforward as that, sure, but it is one element.

No problem faced by any group in society, should be left for that group alone to deal with - it is a problem for all of society, which all of society is responsible for fixing.

If e.g. muslims are being disproportionately discriminated against (as happens in the US with civil liberties), they are in a minority, thus if they are left to resolve their problems alone, they will not be very effective because they are a minority - it is a problem which all of society is responsible for fixing.

Same principle here (which applies even if a group is not a minority) - the womens shelter groups, are concerned with domestic abuse - being concerned with domestic abuse, is a very general area of concern, and is not inherently limited to gender (e.g. like abortion issues are) - to limit that to gender, you have to make an active decision to discriminate.

So what justification is there for then limiting their concerns like that, based on gender? To me, there doesn't seem to be one - there seems to be no reason why their concerns can't be generalized to all genders, while still being able to help the same percentage of domestic abuse victims as before.

stalebread

You can bate the wife....

You can bate the kids.....

But you can't bate the craic👊

An Riabhach

UCDCritic wrote: »

how women have to suffer in silence without a voice and if they try to speak about it no one will listen or mock them because they made a complaint

BULL****.

There are a lot more organisations for battered women than there are for battered men.
Suffering in silence?? Is it not the male victims who do that-seeing as,if they defend themselves against their wife/girlfriend who attack them with a saucepan,club,knife,or any other thing she can use as a weapon-the law still says it is him that could face assault charges??

When it comes to highlighting,domestic violence towards men is very seldom spoken about-but for soap operas and films.BUT IT DOES HAPPEN.

Domestic violence MUST be stopped-and that applies to both women and men.
And in my opinion,the first thing the victim whether male or female should do,before speaking to anyone,is to-by hook or by crook-GET THE **** OUT OF THERE.

Shakespeare's Sister

KomradeBishop wrote: »

No problem faced by any group in society, should be left for that group alone to deal with - it is a problem for all of society, which all of society is responsible for fixing.

If e.g. muslims are being disproportionately discriminated against (as happens in the US with civil liberties), they are in a minority, thus if they are left to resolve their problems alone, they will not be very effective because they are a minority - it is a problem which all of society is responsible for fixing.

Same principle here (which applies even if a group is not a minority) - the womens shelter groups, are concerned with domestic abuse - being concerned with domestic abuse, is a very general area of concern, and is not inherently limited to gender (e.g. like abortion issues are) - to limit that to gender, you have to make an active decision to discriminate.

So what justification is there for then limiting their concerns like that, based on gender? To me, there doesn't seem to be one - there seems to be no reason why their concerns can't be generalized to all genders, while still being able to help the same percentage of domestic abuse victims as before.

I'm not disputing the above, just saying what I think Czarcasm meant - that there's an irony to complaining about society not doing anything, when people making this complaint are also part of that society; whatever that issue may be, and whoever it might concern.

Shakespeare's Sister

Seasan wrote: »

BULL****.

There are a lot more organisations for battered women than there are for battered men.
Suffering in silence?? Is it not the male victims who do that-seeing as,if they defend themselves against their wife/girlfriend who attack them with a saucepan,club,knife,or any other thing she can use as a weapon-the law still says it is him that could face assault charges??

When it comes to highlighting,domestic violence towards men is very seldom spoken about-but for soap operas and films.BUT IT DOES HAPPEN.

Domestic violence MUST be stopped-and that applies to both women and men.
And in my opinion,the first thing the victim whether male or female should do,before speaking to anyone,is to-by hook or by crook-GET THE **** OUT OF THERE.

That's what the OP is saying, just via irony.

Czarcasm

Stheno wrote: »

I think a lot of this is due to the violence being inflicted by one gender upon another, it genderises (if that's even a word) the issue. Raises an interesting point about LGBT violence, is there even one charity in the country supporting victims of domestic voilence there?

There isn't to my knowledge anyway any specific support groups for LGBT victims of domestic violence in this country, and the UK and US aren't much better, because there's a different dynamic again in LGBT relationships to hetero relationships (one of the most obvious examples off the top of my head that I've come across is when one partner threatened to 'out' the other if they broke up), but some LGBT organisations do try and offer support, and Women's Aid I think offer support to women (the extent and exact nature I couldn't be sure of though).

I'd say we're more likely to become aware of domestic violence in same-sex relationships in this country in the next decade or so though.

I can easily see how shelters are single gender for those who are homosexual, as any threat of violence is removed due to the lack of the gender inflicting the violence in the environment, and am fairly sure there have been studies on this.

There aren't really that many (I can't link directly to PDFs on mobile, but you'll get one from 2012 I think on the American CDC website, and then there are a few carried out by various organizations in the States). In a same-sex relationship though, the same gender inflicting the violence would be the same gender in a single-sex shelter, unless I misunderstood you?

The issue is further complicated for transgender persons experiencing domestic violence as you'll read reports of them being rejected, and even ejected from women's shelters if they are found out to be transgender.

KomradeBishop

Shakespeare's Sister wrote: »

I'm not disputing the above, just saying what I think Czarcasm meant - that there's an irony to complaining about society not doing anything, when people making this complaint are also part of that society; whatever that issue may be, and whoever it might concern.

Okey - but isn't challenging peoples arguments with that, very similar to a 'tu quoque' (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu_quoque), which doesn't actually do anything to challenge the arguments made, it just implicitly accuses people (in this case an entire gender) of hypocrisy? (which makes it a fallacious argument)

There doesn't seem to be any possible useful course of debate that can come from that - which is part of why I didn't reply to the post.

Shakespeare's Sister

KomradeBishop wrote: »

Okey - but isn't challenging peoples arguments with that, very similar to a 'tu quoque' (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu_quoque), which doesn't actually do anything to challenge the arguments made, it just implicitly accuses people (in this case an entire gender) of hypocrisy? (which makes it a fallacious argument)

There doesn't seem to be any possible useful course of debate that can come from that - which is part of why I didn't reply to the post.

I'd only view it as worth mentioning if the complaints about inaction by society were accusatory ones.
Otherwise it's a valid concern/discussion of course.

mikeyjames9

Candie wrote: »

Just because a campaign is anti-violence against women doesn't mean it's pro-violence against men.

I can campaign for a blindness charity but it doesn't mean there's no room for a deafness charity.

I hear ya

Call Me Jimmy

Stopping stop-sign production needs to stop!

Czarcasm

KomradeBishop wrote: »

Okey - but isn't challenging peoples arguments with that, very similar to a 'tu quoque' (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu_quoque), which doesn't actually do anything to challenge the arguments made, it just implicitly accuses people (in this case an entire gender) of hypocrisy? (which makes it a fallacious argument)

There doesn't seem to be any possible useful course of debate that can come from that - which is part of why I didn't reply to the post.

No, it's not. It's no more fallacious than your red herring about rights for minority groups when you admit yourself in the same post that this isn't a minority rights issue!

If you call it hypocrisy that women's support groups support women, then I would politely suggest that you look up the meaning of hypocrisy if you want to argue about making fallacious arguments.

The question is a simple one. As Shakespeare's Sister points out -

You want society to care about both genders equally, right?

So how do we get more men to care about men, because it's already the case that not only do more women care about women, but more men care about women too. There are also already many women that care about men, so how do we encourage more men to care about men?

Please don't point to women's support groups and say they should be responsible for men too, it's just not going to happen.

Carlos Orange

Czarcasm wrote: »

So how do we get more men to care about men, because it's already the case that not only do more women care about women, but more men care about women too. There are also already many women that care about men, so how do we encourage more men to care about men?

Society is pretty big on telling men not to have gender based solidarity and that the issues men face as men pale in comparison to what women face. I hear women talk about supporting each other at work purely because they are women but I have the definite impression if I did that it would be frowned upon.

dark crystal

Have a look at some of these statistics and then head off on a rant about gender equality:

http://www.womensaid.ie/policy/natintstats.html

Domestic violence is an issue that can affect both genders, no one is denying that, but overwhelmingly, women are statistically much more likely to be abused or killed by a partner. This is why these campaigns exist, not to stick two fingers up to male victims, but to highlight a very real problem for women.

There have also been similar campaigns for men, but you don't get women making sarcastic and inflammatory posts about those. I just don't get why anyone would have a problem with campaigns like this - it just feels like the worst type of begrudgery to me.

Shakespeare's Sister

Shakespeare's Sister wrote: »

I think Czarcasm is referring to complaints by men regarding nothing being done by society, when those men are part of society and not doing anything (and sometimes blaming feminism). Not as straightforward as that, sure, but it is one element.

So you're saying that Emma Watson should stfu instead of telling me what to do? Gotcha.

Czarcasm

psinno wrote: »

Society is pretty big on telling men not to have gender based solidarity and that the issues men face as men pale in comparison to what women face. I hear women talk about supporting each other at work purely because they are women but I have the definite impression if I did that it would be frowned upon.

Do you participate in any gender based sports at all, soccer, gaelic football, hurling, rugby for example?

Do you participate in online interactions where the vast majority of your interactions will be with men?

Have you ever been to a men's shed group?

Were you aware that this month is Blue September?

Those are just a handful of examples of gender based solidarity that society says are specifically "men only", and promote solidarity among men!

Why are you so worried about being frowned upon?

What does the fact that you care more about what other people think of you than you do about issues that affect you, say about how much you yourself care about those issues?

Yet when you have the opportunity in the online space to promote and raise awareness of issues affecting men, what do you do -

Tell everyone about how you hear women talk to each other, about each other, and if men do that - "it's frowned upon". That's in your head, a perception perpetuated by you, because you're more worried about what "society" thinks of you, than you are about your own welfare.

You don't need me to point out that's not healthy for any man.

Shakespeare's Sister

Deleted User wrote: »

So you're saying that Emma Watson should stfu instead of telling me what to do? Gotcha.

Not sure what you're referring to. If there's a thing featuring Emma Watson saying "Men, don't be violent to women!" yes, absolutely. I don't like these "Them versus us" gendered campaigns either.

Shakespeare's Sister

Shakespeare's Sister wrote: »

Not sure what you're referring to. If there's a thing featuring Emma Watson saying "Men, don't be violent to women!" yes, absolutely. I don't like these "Them versus us" gendered campaigns either.

Neither do I, so I dislike when domestic violence is seen as a one-way street when if anything the main traffic flow seems to be in the other direction. I dislike when statistics which are known to be inaccurate and would be easily adjusted for accuracy are just to support the idea of quotas in politics and elsewhere. I dislike people not being straightforward about stuff you could say.

Shakespeare's Sister

Deleted User wrote: »

I dislike when domestic violence is seen as a one-way street

So do I.

when if anything the main traffic flow seems to be in the other direction.

There's a higher percentage of men experiencing domestic abuse than there is women experiencing domestic abuse? Just asking as I don't know.

All I did was say what I thought Czarcasm meant - that is: if people are going to get accusatory and hostile about society not doing something about something, then it's fair enough to ask what they're doing about it, since they're also part of "society". This could apply to anything, not just domestic violence.

I like your accusatory tone there though in relation to the Emma Watson thing. Good call.

And a note on "these threads". What should they be? Everyone tongue-clucking and saying "yes that is bad" until someone trolls and says "oh well I actually support domestic violence" and various back-and-forth attacks until they're banned?

Shakespeare's Sister

Shakespeare's Sister wrote: »

So do I.

There's a higher percentage of men experiencing domestic abuse than there is women experiencing domestic abuse? Just asking as I don't know.

Here ya go.

Wibbs wrote: »

The major difference between the experience of the genders in the case of domestic abuse is that men are usually the physically stronger, so if they do get physically aggressive the damage caused is likely to be much higher.

However in 2007 Harvard Medical School published the results of a US study involving 11,000 men and women by the American Journal of public health which showed that in 70% of cases of non reciprocal partner abuse, that is one sided abuse by one partner, women were the perpetrator. In the cases of reciprocal partner abuse where both were involved, both genders agreed it was the woman most likely to throw the first blow. That study's results have been repeated elsewhere with pretty much the same figures.

Also I'm pretty sure that the highest rate of domestic violence occurs in lesbian relationships.

All I did was say what I thought Czarcasm meant - that is: if people are going to get accusatory and hostile about society not doing something about something, then it's fair enough to ask what they're doing about it, since they're also part of "society". This could apply to anything, not just domestic violence.

I like your accusatory tone there though in relation to the Emma Watson thing. Good call.

I'm more than a little tired of the whole Emma Watson thing is all.
As for the "society" thing. Well everything starts somewhere. A moan online can be the start of something. Likely won't be but how useless is most crusading for change?

enfant terrible

Shakespeare's Sister wrote: »

So do I.

There's a higher percentage of men experiencing domestic abuse than there is women experiencing domestic abuse? Just asking as I don't know.

All I did was say what I thought Czarcasm meant - that is: if people are going to get accusatory and hostile about society not doing something about something, then it's fair enough to ask what they're doing about it, since they're also part of "society". This could apply to anything, not just domestic violence.

I like your accusatory tone there though in relation to the Emma Watson thing. Good call.

So if I was say unhappy about more women not been in politics, I should not voice my opinion on this imbalance without campaigning for gender quotas and the like?

Shakespeare's Sister

enfant terrible wrote: »

So if I was say unhappy about more women not been in politics

If you said "It's crap the way society won't do anything about it", then it wouldn't be out of line for someone to say "But you're part of society, why don't you do something about it so?"
I'd have thought it's to do with women being less interested in politics though? (And perhaps from a more feminist angle, less encouragement of women to get involved in politics at a more subliminal level, and politics being seen as a bit of an old boys' club?) Not really something that involves injustice IMO.

I should not voice my opinion on this imbalance without campaigning for gender quotas and the like?

Not quite sure what you mean, but I don't agree with gender quotas.

Czarcasm

enfant terrible wrote: »

So if I was say unhappy about more women not been in politics, I should not voice my opinion on this imbalance without campaigning for gender quotas and the like?

What's with all the strawman arguments in this thread? It's worse than the whataboutery at this stage!

Czarcasm

Czarcasm wrote: »

What's with all the strawman arguments in this thread? It's worse than the whataboutery at this stage!

Comparing those 2 things is such a strawman.

enfant terrible

Shakespeare's Sister wrote: »

Not quite sure what you mean, but I don't agree with gender quotas.

What I meant was if I'm not going to do anything about the gender imbalance should I just keep my opinions to myself?

enfant terrible

Czarcasm wrote: »

What's with all the strawman arguments in this thread? It's worse than the whataboutery at this stage!

Just trying to understand, no need to be rude.

Shakespeare's Sister

enfant terrible wrote: »

What I meant was if I'm not going to do anything about the gender imbalance should I just keep my opinions to myself?

No, I'm not saying the topic shouldn't be discussed - it should of course; someone was saying on this thread that he experienced domestic abuse and the guards just dismissed it, which goes to show how the issue drastically needs to be highlighted. But there's nothing wrong with someone suggesting that those who are very vocal about nothing being done, initiate something themselves; whatever the issue may be.

Carlos Orange

Czarcasm wrote: »

That's in your head, a perception perpetuated by you, because you're more worried about what "society" thinks of you, than you are about your own welfare.

So you think more women care about women and more men care about women than men care about men i.e. men show a low degree of solidarity with other men based purely on their shared gender. But you decry the idea that this is based on the way they are raised or negative reinforcement of male solidarity by society. That takes nurture out of the picture. Do you believe men inherently have low gender solidarity for predetermined biological reasons?

Czarcasm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Comparing those 2 things is such a strawman.

I wasn't comparing the terms, I was making a statement of fact, but I can see why you might think I was making a comparison when you're so used to the idea of comparing support for women with the lack of support for men as if the two should actually be equal to achieve gender equality, which distracts from the issue of domestic violence itself.

Instead of arguing equality, all it looks like you're arguing is that women have too much support, and men have none, and in order to redress what you see as an imbalance - women should support men too. You already have women supporting men as they have done for millennia, but where are the men supporting men?

(Please don't point me to any PUA/MRA sites, they're not supporting men by making little of women. That's not equality, unless your aim is to have everyone in a society feel bitter towards each other equally).

Shakespeare's Sister

Shakespeare's Sister wrote: »

No, I'm not saying the topic shouldn't be discussed - it should of course; someone was saying on this thread that he experienced domestic abuse and the guards just dismissed it, which goes to show how the issue drastically needs to be highlighted. But there's nothing wrong with someone suggesting that those who are very vocal about nothing being done, initiate something themselves; whatever the issue may be.

I know people who have campaigned, I know people who went through it, got ****ed by the cops and the courts. Try having a stalker who breaks your windows, smashes up your car, you get a restraining order and she breaks into your house. You call the Gardai and they call around and she's literally wrapped around you and the Gardai won't lay a finger on her and eventually give her a lift home. That's not something simple to campaign about.
When women are the victims it's clear-cut and the campaigning generally is for more money. That's a lot easier to campaign for.

Czarcasm

Czarcasm wrote: »

I wasn't comparing the terms, I was making a statement of fact, but I can see why you might think I was making a comparison when you're so used to the idea of comparing support for women with the lack of support for men as if the two should actually be equal to achieve gender equality, which distracts from the issue of domestic violence itself.

*WHOOOOOOOOSH*
Amazing something could go over your head so far with you up on that high horse. However when one "side" does most of it yet gets most of the support when victims does that not suggest that it's gonna be a bit hard to get near equality.

Instead of arguing equality, all it looks like you're arguing is that women have too much support, and men have none, and in order to redress what you see as an imbalance - women should support men too. You already have women supporting men as they have done for millennia, but where are the men supporting men?

Probably letting them kip on their sofa after the girlfriend hits them with an ashtray.

(Please don't point me to any PUA/MRA sites, they're not supporting men by making little of women. That's not equality, unless your aim is to have everyone in a society feel bitter towards each other equally).

There we go. PUA = MRA = anything other than the picking up the pieces stuff.

enfant terrible

Deleted User wrote: »

I know people who have campaigned, I know people who went through it, got ****ed by the cops and the courts. Try having a stalker who breaks your windows, smashes up your car, you get a restraining order and she breaks into your house. You call the Gardai and they call around and she's literally wrapped around you and the Gardai won't lay a finger on her and eventually give her a lift home. That's not something simple to campaign about.
When women are the victims it's clear-cut and the campaigning generally is for more money. That's a lot easier to campaign for.

Surely you can tell the guards you wants to press charges whatever he thinks no?

enfant terrible

enfant terrible wrote: »

Surely you can tell the guards you wants to press charges whatever he thinks no?

It wasn't me, he was told to leave it. There were no charges for the car or the house windows and I'm amazed he was able to get the restraining order in the first place. There was a bit of non-legal intervention as far as I recall but I wonder how much understanding there would have been the other way around.

Czarcasm

psinno wrote: »

So you think more women care about women and more men care about women than men care about men i.e. men show a low degree of solidarity with other men based purely on their shared gender.

No. I already pointed out to you numerous ways in which men show solidarity with other men based purely on their shared gender. Most men though want nothing to do with MRA's that are more concerned with criticizing women's support groups than they are in advocating for and promoting awareness of issues that affect men. They come off very bitter, and most people want nothing to do with people who are bitter.

But you decry the idea that this is based on the way they are raised or negative reinforcement of male solidarity by society.

I never mentioned anything about their childhood. They're adults now, and should be able to speak for themselves if they want something, rather than stamping their feet and pointing fingers at women's support groups and claiming they get funding and a higher media profile, so we should get the same just because... because equality!

That takes nurture out of the picture. Do you believe men inherently have low gender solidarity for predetermined biological reasons?

Nope, I believe men just don't give a shìt about themselves the same way women do, quite simple really and no need for a scientific analysis. If you want men to care issues that affect men, you have to get them to care about themselves first, and then get them to care about each other.

Pointing fingers at women's support groups and saying they should care for men too gives the impression of men that want to revert back to childhood when women took care of them, if you really want to get all Freudian about it.

Czarcasm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

*WHOOOOOOOOSH*
Amazing something could go over your head so far with you up on that high horse. However when one "side" does most of it yet gets most of the support when victims does that not suggest that it's gonna be a bit hard to get near equality.

No high horse here, just correcting your initial observation. The issue of domestic violence perpetuated by either gender against the other isn't one of equality for me. I'll tell you straight now, I couldn't give a fiddlers for equality. I'd sooner concentrate on encouraging more men to report domestic violence cases instead of listening to anecdotes and then thinking they won't be taken seriously.

Probably letting them kip on their sofa after the girlfriend hits them with an ashtray.

Listening to anecdotes like the above for example. How about instead of offering smart arse quips and anecdotes, you instead try and come up with a way to encourage men to report domestic violence.

There we go. PUA = MRA = anything other than the picking up the pieces stuff.

Nope, I'm just pointing out the obvious correlation people draw between men who try to criticize women's support groups, and the whole bitter PUA/MRA groups that most men want nothing to do with them.

What kind of man do you honestly think besides yourself is going to support you calling for women's support groups to offer support to men too? If you're ever to instill in men that they're not helpless, it might be a good idea to lead by example, instead of pointing out the unfairness of someone else getting more than you are for putting in more work than you did.

Carlos Orange

Czarcasm wrote: »

No. I already pointed out to you numerous ways in which men show solidarity with other men based purely on their shared gender.

I don't really think team sports are a great example of what we are talking about. Any more than 2 guys being friends would be. At work we deal with both the charities you mentioned (and Amen) and between them all contact details we have are for women. I'm sure there are blokes involved but they aren't inherently cases of men caring for men.

If you want men to care about men you have to think about why they don't and not pretend it is nothing to do with the messages they get from society.

Czarcasm

Czarcasm wrote: »

No high horse here, just correcting your initial observation. The issue of domestic violence perpetuated by either gender against the other isn't one of equality for me. I'll tell you straight now, I couldn't give a fiddlers for equality.

The issue of available resources and perception surely is? Or are you being purposely obtuse?

I'd sooner concentrate on encouraging more men to report domestic violence cases instead of listening to anecdotes and then thinking they won't be taken seriously.

Why aren't you doing that right now?

Listening to anecdotes like the above for example. How about instead of offering smart arse quips and anecdotes, you instead try and come up with a way to encourage men to report domestic violence.

Why aren't you doing that right now?

Nope, I'm just pointing out the obvious correlation people draw between men who try to criticize women's support groups, and the whole bitter PUA/MRA groups that most men want nothing to do with them.

That you draw. And that you enjoy drawing. Funny that.

What kind of man do you honestly think besides yourself is going to support you calling for women's support groups to offer support to men too? If you're ever to instill in men that they're not helpless, it might be a good idea to lead by example, instead of pointing out the unfairness of someone else getting more than you are for putting in more work than you did.

So I should go and get in an abusive relationship and then become a crusader?

Czarcasm

psinno wrote: »

I don't really think team sports are a great example of what we are talking about. Any more than 2 guys being friends would be.

I was only working off my experience of talking to both men and women, although I do tend to talk to women more frequently as most of my friends are women. My closest friend however is a man I've known nearly 20 years, and we talk about all manner of personal stuff - because we care for each other. How is that not the same as the women you gave in your example that care about each other?

At work we deal with both the charities you mentioned (and Amen) and between them all contact details we have are for women. I'm sure there are blokes involved but they aren't inherently cases of men caring for men.

Yes, they're women who care for men, you'll also find that the heads of some of the women's support groups are men.

Oh wait, I see it - they're women, in men's support groups? Well people have to earn a living too I suppose, and perhaps it's best hire the best person for the job (that the budget will allow for). I wouldn't care what their gender in that case as long as they could do the job required of them. I'm sure you're also aware then that most social workers and social care workers are women, who vastly outnumber men in the area, so it's no surprise to me to hear a woman involved in an organization that provides support for male victims of domestic violence.

If you want men to care about men you have to think about why they don't and not pretend it is nothing to do with the messages they get from society.

But men make up that society just as much as women do! What's worse is pretending that men have no balls, that they are somehow socially castrated by some imaginary feminist conspiracy or some other such bullshìt that excuses men from taking any responsibility for their own welfare and keeps them inside their own head.

Czarcasm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

The issue of available resources and perception surely is? Or are you being purposely obtuse?

It is for you, it's not for me.

Why aren't you doing that right now?


Why aren't you doing that right now?

Because I'm not interested in campaigns for men that just strike me as just a campaign of bitterness against women.

That you draw. And that you enjoy drawing. Funny that.

If I were in your position, I wouldn't be finding any of this very funny at all. In fact I'd be finding it pathetic, and I'd be looking for a way to distance myself from such nonsense and look to promoting positive support among men, for men, with men in mind, and not just sharing bitter anecdotes about bitches.

So I should go and get in an abusive relationship and then become a crusader?

Yeah, that's exactly what I said. I'm off now tbh, stupid thread has just descended to new levels of stupidity, and when that happens, people stop taking anything you say seriously, and they stop listening, and they don't bother entertaining you any more.

Carlos Orange

Czarcasm wrote: »

I was only working off my experience of talking to both men and women, although I do tend to talk to women more frequently as most of my friends are women. My closest friend however is a man I've known nearly 20 years, and we talk about all manner of personal stuff - because we care for each other. How is that not the same as the women you gave in your example that care about each other?

You know the person you are talking about and have a long pre existing relationship with him. The women in question don't and expect favourable treatment and additional support because of their gender.

Czarcasm wrote: »

But men make up that society just as much as women do! What's worse is pretending that men have no balls, that they are somehow socially castrated by some imaginary feminist conspiracy or some other such bullshìt that excuses men from taking any responsibility for their own welfare and keeps them inside their own head.

Do you react like this to claims that society discourages women from entering collage courses in STEM degrees, is that an imaginary conspiracy that excuses women from taking responsibility? Society is a real thing and it influences peoples behaviour.

mrkiscool2

I'll get to my thoughts in a minute. But first!

tomwaterford wrote: »

I think its a tradional thing womans aid...going back years and years

don't think its founder set out with a **** them attitude to male sufferes of domestic abuse


*I could be wrong though

The woman who founded the first ever Women's Shelter is a woman by the name of Erin Pizzey. A remarkable woman who is from the UK and had an idea that the best way to stop domestic violence and help women victims was to separate them from their partner. So she set up a women's only shelter and was (rightly) lauded internationally and nationally, mainly by feminists. She, however, made a shocking observation while working in the shelter one day. Most of the women in the shelter was violent. She concluded that not all domestic violence was one way and that men have it just as bad. When she suggested getting funding for a male-only shelter, the feminists went ballistic. Their were rallies and protests against her, she received death threats, her house was the subject of a volleying of eggs and other messy items and her dog was murdered. She had to flee to the United States and is now one of the biggest proponents for male rights. Yet, despite all of this, men are still pointed out as the problem in domestic violence and that they shouldn't get shelters because they are naturally violent.

dark crystal wrote: »

Have a look at some of these statistics and then head off on a rant about gender equality:

http://www.womensaid.ie/policy/natintstats.html

Domestic violence is an issue that can affect both genders, no one is denying that, but overwhelmingly, women are statistically much more likely to be abused or killed by a partner. This is why these campaigns exist, not to stick two fingers up to male victims, but to highlight a very real problem for women.

There have also been similar campaigns for men, but you don't get women making sarcastic and inflammatory posts about those. I just don't get why anyone would have a problem with campaigns like this - it just feels like the worst type of begrudgery to me.

Wow, you did not just use a report commissioned by an organisation that gets funding because women are abused in relationships, did you? Of course it is going to say the majority of domestic violence is committed by men against women, funding and jobs depend on it. Also, you know its bogus because even the most conservative report has males as being the victim in 40% of all domestic abuse cases. There is a report posted twice in this thread, I suggest you find it and read it!

Czarcasm wrote: »

Do you participate in any gender based sports at all, soccer, gaelic football, hurling, rugby for example?

Yes, all those sports also have women-only teams too. It's also the reason that Tag and Touch Rugby are the two fastest growing sports in the country-they allow men and women to play together socially. Your point has nothing to do with the argument

Czarcasm wrote: »

Do you participate in online interactions where the vast majority of your interactions will be with men?

Firstly where are you pulling this from? Secondly, guess what? Men and Women do have different interests. If you are posting on the soccer forum you are more than likely talking to men, just a fact that more men enjoy soccer than women!

Czarcasm wrote: »

Were you aware that this month is Blue September?

Yes, just like their is a cervical and breast cancer awareness month for women, men have a health month and a prostate cancer awareness month. It alludes to a point below that society sees it as feminine to talk about your feelings and general well-being to other people. Your less of a man if you do so. That's something that society as a whole has to correct, not just men

Czarcasm wrote: »

Those are just a handful of examples of gender based solidarity that society says are specifically "men only", and promote solidarity among men!

Why are you so worried about being frowned upon?

What does the fact that you care more about what other people think of you than you do about issues that affect you, say about how much you yourself care about those issues?

Yet when you have the opportunity in the online space to promote and raise awareness of issues affecting men, what do you do -

Tell everyone about how you hear women talk to each other, about each other, and if men do that - "it's frowned upon". That's in your head, a perception perpetuated by you, because you're more worried about what "society" thinks of you, than you are about your own welfare.

You don't need me to point out that's not healthy for any man.

It's not a perception, it's a genuine social norm. Which, as I stated above, has to be changed

Now, finally. I can say what I came here to say. Domestic violence, just like any other form of violence, has to stop. I have no problem with both sides running campaigns. That's the way it should be. It's better to work together to stop it happening. That includes educating both sexes it is no right to raise your hand to a partner, educating both sexes in what to do if you are abused and providing supports to both sexes in the case of them being abused. In Ireland, funding for supports for males affected by domestic abuse is 50 times less than what women get. You can't tell me that only 1 in every 50 domestic violence cases are male! There are no shelters for men and a helpline that can be only be manned for 8 hours a day, 5 days a week. This is unacceptable and has to change. No-one deserves to be abused in their own home by the person they probably trust most in the world.

Czarcasm

psinno wrote: »

You know the person you are talking about and have a long pre existing relationship with him. The women in question don't and expect favourable treatment and additional support because of their gender.

From each other though, no? Which I thought was the whole point of your initial post, that women support each other and men don't seem to have that support, and I was pointing out that they do, but that they just don't take advantage of it.

Do you react like this to claims that society discourages women from entering collage courses in STEM degrees, is that an imaginary conspiracy that excuses women from taking responsibility? Society is a real thing and it influences peoples behaviour.

Say what? Why would I think society has anything to do with the career choices women choose to make? Of course I react to such nonsense the same way when some people would try to claim such things are 'Society's fault' as if they exist outside that society so they don't have to take any responsibility for themselves.

Leads me nicely back to my point that men need to start being encouraged to take responsibility for themselves first and foremost, then look out for other men, actually take care of each other and set an example of how you would like to be treated. Other men may not agree, and so what, but the more you do it, the more it becomes second nature to you, and you won't worry about what Society' says.

An Riabhach

Shakespeare's Sister wrote: »

That's what the OP is saying, just via irony.

The OP should at least have put the text in inverted commas-the title of the thread and the content of the post are very confusing.

bnt

Yes, violence against women needs to end. What I'm not getting is why all men are being blamed for it, or being "tasked" with responsibility for stopping it. I'm hearing platitudes about "having conversations" ... with who? I don't know any men who are violent towards women, nor would I want to. So where or when would I have these "conversations"? Being a man isn't like being in a club, we don't have meetings ...