Why does society find violence against men funny, yet violence against women is seen as one of the worst things you can do? Shouldn't violence against men been seen as the same? Stories about men being kicked or injured in the groin is met with laughter, not sympathy. Is there any reason other than apathy? Other than society says it's ok? Why does society say it's ok? (since the last attempt at this has turned into a back and forth on issues not particularly related)
Let sleeping dogs lie. Having read through the previous post (which I'm not going to get involved in) it looks like it's a matter of time before it gets hijacked by one side or the other. There is a significant lack of debate in that thread, and we don't need another of its type.
I'll tell you what Pal. WHEN you donate your ten dollars to the site, and create your OWN forum, you can critisize all you like. In the meanwhile, THIS is the "Men's Issues" forum. Now. To the subject: I agree. MALES are RAPED all the time. Most police take the report seriously enough. Some, laugh you right out of the station house! Males are Historically, the (ahem!) "Stronger Sex". That simply isn't true.
Matt: Maybe you misunderstood me. Looking over the thread in question, it seems that a lady took issue with the entire conversation, took it over, had a poster banned, and then pulled in her brother biker as backup. Another moderator had to step in because it was spiralling out of control. I was wondering what was proposed this time around to prevent a reoccurence. *Looks at lap* I happen to be male. Who do I give the $10 to?
Men are even raped by women, with drugs or alcohol involved (and I don't mean anally here). A lot of people can't seem to wrap their heads around that, that a man could be raped by a woman. I wish there was a better way of dealing with stuff like this. My univ. set up a men's centre this year, but even the director of the women's centre didnt' understand why they needed one. Gah, because guys can't talk about this sort of stuff easily, it's so hush-hush, most people blame the guy for not being strong enough to stop that sort of thing from happening yet they rarely try to blame the woman (except in court... but I wont' get into that) for not stopping it.
I'll take a stab at it, if I may. *stab* I think in the beginning, it was probably a case of "Man Bites Dog". Though the whole "rule of thumb" expression is an urban legend, historically violence against women WAS condoned. So the idea that a woman would be "uppity" enough to grab the rolling pin and clout the drunk husband coming home at 3am would be akin to that Lil' Rascals gag in which Spanky actually "spanks" his own father. When the 1960s rolled around, a lot of pressure cookers got unleashed. WWII had proven that women could work and many continued to work when the men came home. But having enjoyed a society in which they basically had autonomy and responsibility (even being the baseball players!) one couldn't get the jack-in-the-box back into the box. And of course at the same time we had Black Power, Gay Liberation, etc as people started questioning everything, as in, yeah, wait a sec... which was a good thing. And some of the rhetoric, even today, was quite incendiary - "let's swing the pendulum" - read some of the SCUM manifesto, for example. Put into a historical context, back then women were valued much less than men - and the women that wrote that could remember a time in which women who didn't wear makeup or want to get married and have kids were put in loony bins. So the idea of turning the tables on stereotypical male behaviour - the idea of the woman being Ralph Kramden, would have been quite the empowering notion. Of course, as time goes on, simultaneous pressure on men (who found that if they adopted the "sensitive" causes they'd get a more positive response from women in general) as well as the new economic issues of television advertising, which for decades was aimed more to the often-at-home housewife than the man of the house made for some interesting media images and some radical changes. Men didn't question why it was OK for a man to be assaulted by a woman because they still clung to chauvinistic notions that they shouldn't - and the new-man sensitivity notion that it's never acceptable. Now they can't. Of course, the very real danger of applying stereotypes to things is that they get absorbed. Whereas in the beginning dish soap was sold to women showing the savvy woman using Zudzo brand and the clueless mentally deficient husband trying to get the job done with Brand X - nowadays it's practically canon that men are useless at anything. In fact, people often marvel at some men who are single fathers who in fact CAN do dishes, bathe children and get those stubborn spots out of the carpet quite handily, whereas realistically speaking in both genders you'll have equal numbers of capable and useless people. And of course, the ads and films showing casual violence against men for humor value has led to a society in which violence against men is casual and even funny. Men aren't allowed to be macho anymore. There was the time when if two guys had a problem they sorted it out. The same time period in which, in fact, if you saw a neighbourhood kid scrawling something on a wall you smacked him upside the head, marched him home to his dad, and the dad would tie a fire to his ass with a belt. Nothing was ever thought of two men settling their differences with fists in a relatively restricted physical combat, nor of belting the kid. Thankfully we no longer consider it acceptable to hit the kids, but we've also lost the notion that a neighbour is allowed to collar a wayward kid and drag him back to his family reporting on the misdeeds. We've also lost the whole macho notion that was the raison d'etre for the gag in the first place. So we've basically told the men to stop being violent, and will haul them before a court if they are - but we have not yet pulled back the corollary parts of our society. We accept a woman can assault a man because he's expected to take (and give) a punch when needed, and because he probably cuffs her one in the mouth if the dinner's not on the table. But sadly, he isn't actually expected to take a punch anymore, and he probably isn't cuffing the missus in the mouth.
I think also part of it is the continued expectation in society that men be sturdier. Though expected to use "product" in their hair, wear silk shirts, etc. and drink margaritas rather than beer, they are also expected to be the only gender drafted and to "stand up" to a potential aggressor.
Because when a man is kicked in the nuts, most other men will laugh at that, whereas if a woman is hit, other women won't laugh at that.... Most men won't laugh at a man getting beat up or raped though. But I don't believe that that violence is tolerated in society.
That is pretty damn profound. I never really looked at it that way. Why is this? I don't meet my female friends with an insult, yet most of the men I know (dh included) usually do. Me: (meeting Sondra, my bestie) "Hey, sweetie, how was that headache you had yesterday? Can I get you anything?" Sondra declines anything and I drop it and give her a hug. My dh (meeting Jonnie, his best bud) while pounding him on the back: "Fuck you, ya fartwad, wanna beer? No? Are you going fag on me? Have a fuckin beer!" So, to save face, Jonnie does. And these are two dudes who are REALLY good freinds....... Is there more compassion from the gentle sex? (hey, womyn can get pretty catty with each other, but usually after one feels betrayed by the other) Or are men more afraid to express compassion for their fellow males, and thus less able to tolerate "weakness" from their peers? I don't know the answer to this. I am just saying Floyd had a good point.
I was not going to get in this debate but I feel I have been judged here in these statements. I'm was/am not high jacking anything I am responding to accustation with no foundation. OUT and OUT LIES. In the first place I was relating to abuse and did not place the blame on men by themselves. I was relating to events that happen to me and others as in comparison to abuse in it's self. Second as I stated before I did NOT get anyone banned. I mean really.. I'm not a child I don't play games. I would like to see evidence to my crime before I am judged and comdemed. As far as Ranger speaking up, he did that of his own disire. I had not asked him to come in and take care of anyone for me, we had not even discussed it. We have other things to talk about besides this forum. He stated his opinion with out my encouragement. Now with that said. I would appercieate it if people would get their facts straight before they accuse some one of things that are not true. I have not even bad reped anyone. I feel these statements were to draw me in and are made with vile intent. Thank you for your time and your patcients. Shameless_heifer
