Looks like IgNobe got zotted. Not that that's a bad thing; the comments that he made in the VAWA thread certainly didn't help matters. It's my personal bitch with the masculist groups. They do far more harm than good.
That said, that thread will be the last one that I will participate in regarding men's issues in any way, shape or form. It's good that I was able to finally get into a civil discussion with Lemonnier (and to a degree, I think, with reprobate), but I'm simply tired of having to take two pages to establish that I'm genuinely concerned about both -- not looking to trump one over the other -- and then getting little response, if any, for requests for input, information, pointers or suggestions.
It's a sad fact but guys who have been victimized quickly learn that they can expect one of two responses to their disclosure of it: what happened to you was bad but you know that you can't do jack about it, so swallow it and drive on; or anger, insults, ridicule and dismissal. The best that they can look forward to is being told that they're powerless.
It's true that the number of women killed by intimates is 3:1 to the number of men. It's also true that this is because they were originally 1:1, roughly, but the rates for male victims declined more quickly, consistently, for three decades. To me this begs for an explanation, and possibly for different tactics. I fail to see why this is a hostile view.
The ironic thing is that when these discussions calm down, I and those I'm in discussion with almost always find that we have similar views. In those cases where we don't, it's usually over a matter of how the changes we're talking about might be exploited by others. It comes down to a difference in risk assessment, not to one of sentiment.
But the situation doesn't benefit anyone; I have a difficult time seeing what good can come out of presumptive denigration and militant interaction. This reinforces the motivations, ideas and policies of those who have already fallen into the masculist camp, and it shoves those who are on the reasonable edge closer to its precipice. Those who don't succumb to the temptation simply retreat. They sit down and shut up... and nothing changes.
That's the situation at its best -- and it still bodes ill.
I sincerely hope that some day we'll be able to work arm-in-arm to solve these problems. But that day is not today. In all likelihood, it's not tomorrow, either... and the dawn of that day may be some time in coming.
In the mean time I'll do what I can in darkness, with my eyes always on the horizon.
That said, that thread will be the last one that I will participate in regarding men's issues in any way, shape or form. It's good that I was able to finally get into a civil discussion with Lemonnier (and to a degree, I think, with reprobate), but I'm simply tired of having to take two pages to establish that I'm genuinely concerned about both -- not looking to trump one over the other -- and then getting little response, if any, for requests for input, information, pointers or suggestions.
It's a sad fact but guys who have been victimized quickly learn that they can expect one of two responses to their disclosure of it: what happened to you was bad but you know that you can't do jack about it, so swallow it and drive on; or anger, insults, ridicule and dismissal. The best that they can look forward to is being told that they're powerless.
It's true that the number of women killed by intimates is 3:1 to the number of men. It's also true that this is because they were originally 1:1, roughly, but the rates for male victims declined more quickly, consistently, for three decades. To me this begs for an explanation, and possibly for different tactics. I fail to see why this is a hostile view.
The ironic thing is that when these discussions calm down, I and those I'm in discussion with almost always find that we have similar views. In those cases where we don't, it's usually over a matter of how the changes we're talking about might be exploited by others. It comes down to a difference in risk assessment, not to one of sentiment.
But the situation doesn't benefit anyone; I have a difficult time seeing what good can come out of presumptive denigration and militant interaction. This reinforces the motivations, ideas and policies of those who have already fallen into the masculist camp, and it shoves those who are on the reasonable edge closer to its precipice. Those who don't succumb to the temptation simply retreat. They sit down and shut up... and nothing changes.
That's the situation at its best -- and it still bodes ill.
I sincerely hope that some day we'll be able to work arm-in-arm to solve these problems. But that day is not today. In all likelihood, it's not tomorrow, either... and the dawn of that day may be some time in coming.
In the mean time I'll do what I can in darkness, with my eyes always on the horizon.
legionnaire:
When crime meets cultural biases, dangerous things happen. I agree with you completely - but the problem is that idiotic "men's movement" groups that are just reactionaries masquerading as activists have hijacked the entire discussion. With them in play you're either a misogynist or you're "feminized" - with everyone missing the obvious point that these should be human rights issues, rather than gender specific ones. It's a charged topic.