Ever Feel Like You're Banging Your Head Against A Brick Wall?(19 Posts)
Hope those of you without Facebook can see this
Seriously, though. How many times will MRA's trott out the old "wimminz are lying about us abusing them" claims? Really?
Any time it looks like something good helpful/ useful/ necessecery for women shows up.
Gods forbid we ever end up on equal terms with men. We don't deserve to have our view heard over men, because all we would do is lie about how mean they are
Seriously. First thing that Jamie person chucks up is how he's lost respect for Boris Johnson after that. For defending the rights of honest victims. Because how dare anyone think on the behalf of those in need of justice?
MRAs see this as an important issue. Feminists don't. [shrugs]
I imagine that if, to use a poor analogy, 3 in 50 job applications were refused because the applicant was a woman, we would see 6% as a significant number.
I'm sorry, but that analogy is so weak that I don't see the point you're trying to make.
You said "how many times will MRA's trott out the old "wimminz are lying about us abusing them" claims?". They are basing their "wimminz are liars" argument on 6% of DV claims being false - you clearly don't regard this 6% as enough to establish a legitimate argument that there is a problem. I was saying that if there were some issue were 6% was the figure that feminists were arguing about because it negatively impacted women, it would be a big deal, and would not be dismissed.
Also, I can't see in that link anywhere where people are saying "wimminz [ugh, just as bad as menz] are liars". There are false accusations, 1 in 20-ish, and the falsely accused should have help too.
I'm not saying the falsely accused aren't deserving of help. But they are in the minority. Every time the "wimminz are liars" line gets trotted out, it damages the fight against domestic violence.
The individual in question stated that he'd been put off Boris Johnson for defending the women who become victims of domestic abuse. Because he hadn't considered all the men who were victims of false claims. Not then few men, but all the men... Funnily enough, every abuser I've come across (be it an ex, a friend's ex, etc) believed they were the victim of a false claim. Very few men who are guilty of abuse put their hands up and say "yes, I abused her". Even now, I know my ex lies about what he put me through. Is he one of these "falsely accused"? Because he'd honestly believe he was.
I think the fight against DV needs to shift, perhaps an element of the MR movement is right here. Although there is still a huge problem, public perception does seem to be lacking for female-on-male DV - how many times in the media have we seen a man get slapped, with the implication that he deserved it, with no consequences for the woman? You would never see the reverse, quite rightly, because campaigns and activists have made M-on-F DV not joking matter.
MrsReasonable......'eh? 6% of false claims against 60% of rapists getting away with it....is Fuck all. If MRAs want equality in rape, tell men to stop fucking raping.
If it turned out that only 3 out of 50 job applications (and especially those involving promotions) were refused because the applicant were a woman, I'd be delighted. And if only it were that blatent.
I think the 6% statistic is for false rape claims. Another MRA bugbear. I don't know the stats for false DV claims.
But we're not talking about men who are the victims of DV MrsR, we're talking about the much, much greater number of women who are and the kneejerk response of misogynist men who resent those women being helped.
There is never any shortage of men and women bleating on about the fact that "this happens to men too" when we discuss issues that overwhelmingly damage women. But this is the feminist section of mumsnet, where for once, women are put at the centre of the discussion. Which in itself is considered outrageous by misogynists - the outrage of discussing stuff that overwhelmingly happens to women without ensuring that at least 50% of our discussion includes stuff about the menz as well. The cheek of it!
Funnily enough, such men never feel the need to conduct their discussions with reference to women's needs and damage. But they get very angry with women if we focus on women. And they feel an overwhelming need to get us all off the subject we were discussing, and talking about the most important thing - men.
Which is what the OP was about.
I'm not 100% on what false claims for domestic abuse are, but suspect that it wouldn't be too different to any other false claims for assault.
I have no problem with asking if it will help the male victims of domestic violence, provided people remember that women are significantly more likely to be victims. What I have problems with is men saying "but what about those of us who have false claims made against us".
XP told me once that his xWife was manipulative enough to lie her way into a refuge. I was young and naive enough to believe him, and forgot about it until the second time I went into a refuge, and it dawned on me. He wouldn't have admitted he'd hurt her, he would have just been getting the "false" claim in, in case she ever tried to warn me. I found out after I left that he used every excuse under the sun as to why I'd fled half way across the country with our DS. No man ever admits to being an abusive dick. Not unless they have something to gain from it.
An abuser will always deny the abuse and deflect; as a collective group they are charming.
The MRAs will always find a woman to love them.
Abusive men have a huge vested interest in pretending that false claims of rape, domestic violence, etc., are rife; also when they lie about women not allowing them to see their children; if normal men and women believe that there is an epidemic of women out there who are falsely accusing blameless men of rape and DV, and denying access to their children unreasonably, then those abusive men can carry on merrily abusing without anyone ever questioning their story.
It is so normal for your average guy to say: "my ex makes it difficult for me to see my kids" - he doesn't need to say "because she's an unreasonable bitch", the myth of the unreasonable harpy bitch is so strong, that we all understand that that's they dynamic and we sympathise with him. If that narrative were not so strong, the default response would be suspicion rather than sympathy: "why doesn't she let him see them? What motive could she have? What has he done to make her behave like that?"
It is in the interests of abusive men to bang on over and over and over again about the minority of cases where innocent men are fucked over by awful women, pretending that that is the big issue, when the much larger issue is women being fucked over by abusive men. When you tell people that 1 in 4 women are raped or sexually assaulted in their lives, only about 4% of rape allegations are false and between 60-90% of rapes aren't even reported, that 1 in 4 women are hit by their partners but that most don't report it until they've been attacked well over 30 times - the shock is palpable - people think you're lying or mistaken or exaggerating, because the opposite narrative - that rape and DV are rare and masses of women lie about it when it's not happening to them - is so embedded in our culture.
And every time people like the dicks on that thread bang on about those exceptions as if they are the norm they are helping maintain that narrative. As feminists we should be very clear about that.
I am clear. And that is thanks to the clarity of thought and text that you, dittany and many others have demonstrated time and time again, HerBeBollox (love the new name)
I had a funny moment in the pub a few weeks ago, A friend of a friend was banging on in exactly those whiney terms and I did a little gentle (honest!) feminist-type questioning. He ended up storming out, huling abuse at me and throwing his chair away in the process. I think my face said all the QEDs that were needed.
Agree with the OP. Tedious indeed.
AyeRobot Curious as to what your friend thought of their friend's hissy fit? Did it cast him in a different light or was he just accepted as a neanderthal type already? I once had a stand up/sit down row (he stood over me shouting/I sat down looking surprised) with a chap on a third date. He was a bit of a
38 year old lad and we got on to the subject of porn and I was pointing out that women had no power in porn/exploitation/abuse/filmed rape etc and he thought that by shouting at me he would establish that there were lots of female porn directors and that women enjoyed being paid for things like DVDA. It ended with him crying on me at a bus stop explaining that I made him feel intellectually inferior and why was he always attracted to women that were smarter than him and how this made him angry. I gently suggested he had huge ishoos with the way his dad had treated his mum (and now treats him) and maybe he should speak to someone about this, preferably someone he was not attempting to date... we continued to be friends for a bit (he needed some legal advice) but thankfully it all petered out.
But I was surprised at how (like in your scenario) the rage was 0-60 just from a conversation, me never raising my voice, and him towering over me (6ft 5, me 5ft 5) in a bar (noisy and dark enough that no one really batted an eyelid at our table) and how it was almost like lighting a fuse. Quite, quite scary and extremely irrational.
Hels, my friend just said "I think you might have a point" to which he got withering response, given that he said nothing during the exchange except to make a few appeasement type comments.
And yes, "You think you're so fucking clever" was deployed.
Gotta love the Patriarchy.
They really hate it when you're cleverer than them don't they?
"You think you're so fucking clever" actually translates as "I think you're very clever, I suspect that contrary to natural law, you are cleverer than me, and I deeply resent you for it".
Join the discussion
Please login first.