Can we talk about female violence? I need to get my response straight

But Basil you are one of the people asking if others think JayZ is devastated.

So you may feel you've covered it but I don't think it is covered and it repeatedly crops up for me.

Ronald McDonald I think we've already been through all this further down the thread.

Human violence is a subset of all violence? What? Violence is a human concept, you can't talk about other species using "violence". I've just had a vision of a pig in a mediaeval dock being tried for a violent crime.

That's what comes of keeping your wits active.

Dervel:

"Taking the view that violence is the unavoidable nature of man robs us of the will and the insight to evolve past it."

No, it merely acknowledges that through social means it can only be reduced or modified, and not eliminated. Because violence fundamentally stems from physiological organization, and violence between humans is a subset of all violence, we see that saying violence is not innate is like saying that human voice is not innate. Obviously, someone who has never learned language can still produce laryngeal sound unless there is some other deficit or impairment.

This might be easier to grasp if you distinguish social violence from physiological violence per se.

I've been violent a few times in my life. Either via words or actions. Every time the over riding emotions are anger righteousness vengeance and power. No matter the size off the opponent. Women feel these too you know.

No I have no idea how Jay Z felt to be violently attacked by another human. I have no idea what the pattern is or if this is a one off or just a small aspect of what goes on

I think that when people say things along the lines of - well there is a height weight strength disparity it somehow makes it different or okay.
I am uncomfortable with that.

I know that we say that we think violence and abuse is wrong but there seems to be some extra aspect of needing to show it to be grave or very serious violence for us to take it seriously if it is directed toward men.
In some circumstances the first slap from a woman can start a pattern of domestic abuse and fear in the same way that it can from a man. I think that we rarely acknowledge that this can be the case.

For all we know Solange could be frequently violent toward JayZ
She could be frequently violent toward many people perhaps in an inter-familial context If this attack had occurred from a small man to a taller woman I think that we would never have questioned whether she was bothered by it.
That isn't because it is framed within a patriarchy. I think that there is a difficulty in generally acknowledging the very real problems of female violence and abuse within a domestic setting. I say this as someone who often struggles with the concept myself which given the nature of my work is very difficult.

I suppose it is quite hard to hear that your voice is heard and you are responded to with respect, and people are.polite when you interrupt, and defer to you and your position not because you're a good sort with reasonable things to say, but because the rest of us have been socialised to expect violence off you.

Do you think Solange exerts a coercive, controlling influence over Jay Z Ronald McDonald, that she has power over him and that her violence towards him happened in a context of that coercive relationship, backed by a social and economic framework that supports the habitual coercion she exerts against him?

er...I know this is obvious but it seems that it isn't to some
domestic abuse is classless and seems to escape levels of financial income

there are many women and men in relationships where they are coerced controlled beaten and abused because they have been in the relationship long enough that they believe there is no other choice
externally there is, logically there is but psychologically there isn't

fear of the court system access to children and who 'gets it' next are also factors for why the relationships are maintained.

You don't have to a large person to abuse another person. It isn't stature that matters, it is intent.
Saying things along the lines off, 'well I'm sure Jay-Z isn't too hurt' is utterly missing the point.

Jeebus why do you think you should bring your personal offence into this discussion? What are you adding to the analysis of male violence or male privilege?

AskBasil has answered the question you asked in a way that uses class analysis. You have taken offence and posted several derogatory comments about her responses highlighting your offence. Do you think women should care how you feel when we are discussing structural oppression? If so, why?

Are you actually avoiding the question or am I being a bit obscure?

Of course it's not nice to think of the exploitation and cruelty on which our society is based. That's why so many people prefer not to think of it, or if they do think of it deny it's happening or it's that bad, or decide that it's just human nature so there's nothing we can do about it.

But you know I'm not talking about that, don't you? You know I'm talking about the actual human experience of being in a privileged group and being given an easy ride - being liked, valued, appreciated - by people in a group which your group exploits just because you individually meet the basic standard of decency and aren't currently at that particular time, exploiting anyone in the room. I'm talking about how structural oppression infects human relationships. Even at the level of individual friendship, white people are at an advantage, men are at an advantage, heterosexuals are at an advantage etc.

You may not feel good about racism, sexism, homophobia etc. Neither do I. But the fact is, even at the level of a friendship or casual meetings, those of us in the oppressor groups, are given a far easier ride than we would be, if racism, sexism etc. didn't exist. Everyone likes being liked and we get liked more because of the bastards no-one likes.

Do you disagree with that?

I have privilege because I am a white male in a developed country, with a good education. My ancestors conquered and subjugated continents, took the riches and natural resources, slaughtered people and built the society that I - and many of us on here - now benefit from. Do we feel good about it? Does it feel nice?

Even now, I can, if I so choose, buy clothing and goods produced by people enslaved by poverty, working in deadly conditions, for next to no reward. It stinks. I don't feel good about it. If anyone else is in a similar position, do you enjoy that privilege? Does it feel nice?

The concept of privilege is neither new nor revelatory.

Ooh aren't you touchy. Hit a nerve, haven't I. FWIW, I do think it must feel nice, because I have felt that feeling myself as a member of a privileged group (white) when I've felt the unearned approbation of people in a non-privileged group just because I'm not a bloody raging racist. I suspect that every decent person in a privileged group has felt that at some time or other and it's bloody uncomfortable to recognise and acknowledge it because the reason we feel it, is because of the other members of our group who ensure that the bar to be considered a decent person is so low that we get over it with no effort whatsoever and in fact get extra points and get to congratulate ourselves on what nice liberal people we are.

Would you actually like to address that point? Or would you rather just accuse me of spite for making it?

Jeebus look at the data on deaths century by century, deaths down to murder, violence etc have been steadily declining. Now if you know about evolution you know that that is process in the tens of thousands of years. Therefore it is safe hypothesis environment is much more crucial, and where we look to change.

Besides the point that even if you are right and the data is not conclusive, we CAN change environment and not our basic nature, logically we should try as in the first instance we may make things better, if we don't we definately won't. Secondly we may reach a sounder comprehension of the nature/nurture debate. Either way it's worth it.

It isn't a spiteful idiotic statement at all Jeebus.

You perceive it that way because you are reading it as a personal statement about Jeebus, when in fact it is a statement that applies to all men within male dominated society. What Basil has done in her above (excellent) posts is set out a political analysis, a class analysis; not a personal attack or judgement. In other words, it isn't all about you.

Men who acknowledge their state of privilege are able to admit that it is a pretty easy ride when one is considered an awesome progressive prince of a fella simply by meeting minimum standards of human decency, (particularly considering that one continues to benefit from the lack of decency of others and one poses neither threat nor challenge to the system that perpetuates an unfair status quo of oppression and exploitation for some and privilege and dominance for others).

That's good for you huh? Must feel nice.

What a spiteful, idiotic statement.

"So you think I can feel happy and secure in the knowledge that other men knock the shit out of people? It is an awful thing to say frankly, but it says more about you than me."

You specifically asked why you don't beat up your wife/ DC's rape etc.

I answered you as best I could, pointing out that every individual in a privileged group, doesn't have to do the oppressing in order to benefit from the privilege.

So you stamp your foot and accuse me of attributing feelings to you that I don't know you have and am not that interested in whether or not you have them. I don't care if you are happy or unhappy about men knocking the shit out of people. Your individual feelings are irrelevant - whether you like it or not, you benefit from it. So does Dervel and he acknowledges it and actively works to undermine his own privilege.

As to why some men are happy to take on the oppression on behalf of the rest of you, I don't think there's any mysterious head-scratchingly difficult answer to that. Some people are just nicer than others, full stop. Some people just feel more entitled than others. Some people are more willing to share than others. Some people in a privileged group are prepared to actively work to give up their unearned privilege and IMO they are the nicest ones. Some are prepared to give up some of their privileges as long as it's not too much and they aren't too keen to examine their privilege too closely. Some refuse to acknowledge that they have any privilege at all because they don't want to lose it and arguably they may be the ones who distance themselves most from the cruelty of the more extreme members of their group because acknowledging that that cruelty enables their privilege, means acknowledging the privilege in the first place and they don't want to do that. And some think their privilege is justified and God-given (usually) or natural and there's nothing wrong with it. You would have to look at childhood and adolescent experiences and influences to unravel why some people choose which group to be in and I'm not sure you'd be able to draw any useful conclusions.

I'm not positing this as a scientific group classification btw, just off the top of my head what springs to mind in considering why some people do the things they do. Wd be interested to hear other opinions.

To other people reading this - is there a common differentiator between those men (or women) who are violent, and those who are not, given a common environment? If it is privilege, why isn't violent action uniform across the privileged group?

I was hoping that nobody would take the 'bully for you, want a cookie?' response to my last point. I wish you had resisted.

So you think I can feel happy and secure in the knowledge that other men knock the shit out of people? It is an awful thing to say frankly, but it says more about you than me.

Oh and that is why feminists get irritated with men who claim to be in favour of equality while doing nothing to fight against men who do inflict violence, rape etc. on women.

All men benefit from their unearned privilege. Women are kept in line by male violence. You don't have to inflict it yourself, to benefit from women being kept in line. So when you wash your hands of it, pretend it's nothing to do with you and it's the problem of those narsty men over there, it rings hollow.

Jeebus - because you don't need to, other men are doing it for you.

They will ensure that you keep your privilege.

How many times have you heard women say they're lucky, because their DH does his fair share of housework/ doesn't hit them/ is good in bed/ insert excellent thing here?

All the time women are grateful for men treating us as real human beings, the ones like you who are merely normal, are being perceived as paragons of desirability. That's good for you, huh? Must feel nice.

Also, the other reason most men don't do those things, is because in spite of patriarchy, men are human. Incredibly, amazingly, patriarchy hasn't managed to completely destroy men's humanity and therein lies our hope.

Outs, my anecdata was about non-identical twins (the word was split over two lines so you missed it). Hence their environment being shared, but not all their genes. That was why I made the point.

As much as some people would like to lay the causes of violence solely at the door of socialisation/patriarchy/privilege, there is too much research that points to other contributing factors. I know why feminism does this, I just don't agree.

Reading all this had made me consider my own position. White western male, educated, (mostly) law-abiding, brought up in a country where the I am a member of the dominant, privileged elite, and brought up at a time when physical punishment was acceptable - smacks at home, corporal punishment at school. Furthermore, from this board I have learned that there is a shitload of stuff I could do and get away with, because of my status (or at least have a very high chance of not being prosecuted). So why don't do do this? Why don't I hit my kids, why don't I hit my wife, why don't I fight in the pub or at the football, why don't I beat up and rape?

It isn't, Honey's just come here with her anti-feminist "they're all white rich women" bollocks because she couldn't find a more suitable thread to post that crap on.

Umm, not sure why you're posting about the middle classness of feminists on this thread about violence, honey. But would point to the ways that exactly that class position overlaps with academic education. Hmm, I'm sure.I.read.that teaching women to.read has the biggest effect on the fertility rate than any other intervention (free contraception/ family planning advice/ incentives and tax breaks etc.) Still can't work out why this is relevant to the violence discussion...

Honey22 your point has been dealt with. "And yes, of course there are exceptions, but focusing on the exceptions rather than the rule..."

is what you're doing.

Also comparing a rich white woman in the west to a poor man in the developing world, is pointless. You need to compare her to a rich white man in the west and compare the poor man in the developing world to a poor woman of the same class to find out about sexual inequality.

Race, class and income inequalities do not preclude sex inequalities. But as a matter of fact you're wrong about poverty being more of a factor in domestic violence than sex, and insulting to poor men, who are no more likely to attack their female intimate partner, than rich men. DV crosses class.