Evidence of misandry on Feminist chat.

The big difference is the way in which women have to risk assess.

Men don't have to this to anything like the same extent, if it all.

Men are victims of other men's violence but there is usually a reason - men are more likely to resolve conflicts with violence (whether that conflict be a personal argument, organised crime conflict, gang rivalry, whatever).

Women are victim's of other men's violence but often in a random way. And men are more likely to use violence in interpersonal conflict with women than women are with men.

So women are on a constant footing of vigilance. Men aren't, or at least anywhere near so much. That's what they don't get with all this NAMALT stuff. It's not "all men" we need to beware of; it's "all environments where men are".

Denying men commit the majority of violent crime will not stop it happening will it?

We’ve come a long way in recent times in women being able to openly talk about sexual violence and relationship violence and simply retorting namalt seems really unfair in this context. Of course it’s shocking when you start talking about rape, sexual assault and domestic violence and abuse and you see how pervasive it is in women’s lives.

Infanticide pat
Never mind there were 12 recorded cases between April 2004 and March 2015. And that there is a strong link with psychosis.
Women do bad stuff too! I proved it! So stop trashing men!

Actually thinking about it fraud isn't always a victimless crime. I was thinking of fraud effecting companies and banks etc. Individuals can be devastated by fraud.
My bad.

In that case all CEOs of every store setting targets to increase profits each year are criminals.

Shoplifting is not a victimless crime. It pushes prices up, penalising the poorest in society.

Oh look.
And I just read my own screenshot. The list goes on only a couple of lines below the shot, but the last data captured shows

Males constituted for 58.7% of those arrested for FRAUD.

I even believed the myth myself.
So above there are only two valid examples not three...

It's actually quite difficult to find bad things women are doing more of than men, I actually really trying believe me.

There are many bad things (albeit not as bad) which I'm sure many more than 0.003% of UK women do
I can think of three things "bad" women do that men are not already doing much more of. Shoplifting and fraud, both of which are victimless crimes, and prostitution which is a crime under certain circumstances in the UK. I would not call prostitution a victimless crime because the woman herself is the victim of a system here.

Can we use these to tar all women with the same brush
Well, not quite tarring all women with the same brush, but I simply do not see women as so much of a potential threat than I see males so I do have a judgement wrt that yes.

or demand that women in general assume responsibility for standing up and taking action, even when they themselves are not guilty
Well I am not guilty of prostitution myself but I do support the Nordic model and promote the ideologies against prostitution and "take action" where I can and do try to encourage other women to help, eg donate to women's aid.

It's slightly more than 1% of males who cause problems for us women I'm afraid.

Careful..
I'm about to trash men...

Almost half of male college surveyed admitted coercing a partner into sex. Almost all coercive behaviours listed met the legal definition of rape (Ok this is in America but I we are very similar to them)...

Remember ladies, we must not mention the problem of male sexual entitlement or male violence. Ever. The worst thing about it is that it makes men look bad and it totes amounts to misandry.

Not all men murder their partners so male violence against women isn't a thing?

Come on folks, you can do better than that

I'm still not clear what "trashing men" means. Do you mean by saying that there isn't a woman I know who hasn't had some sort of unpleasant experience at the hands of a man? By saying that at the extreme end two women are killed a week by men but an order of magnitude more are hurt or harassed by men? Is that trashing men? Because I find it deeply distasteful that anyone can look at those facts and think "trashing men" rather than "shit that's awful-what can I do to change that?"

Yes - two deaths a week, be it murder or manslaughter is two too many. Also it’s right that the starting sentence for such crimes is a lengthy custodial one. The vast majority of the above 31m men in the UK would I think agree with that.

99% of men are not like this

Of the 99% of men, we don't know which have not been caught, charged or jailed you mean?

That is the problem. Much violence, abuse and rape does not get taken further, this is widely known by women so reports aren't made. I do not know one woman who has never been abused, attacked, stalked or treated badly by at least one man in their lives.

we frequently see this 'two a week' statistic used an an excuse to trash men.

Would you agree 'two a week' is two too many?

The figures on crime look really bad for men (if true). However the reality is that if 1% of adults have been convicted of violent crime (I am struggling to dig out the statistic) and 90% are men, 0.9% of men commit violent crime (yes, some go unconvicted, but the point stands).

So, instead of NAMALT, maybe we should run with ‘99% of men are not like this’. It does not have the Same ring to it!

The numbers may be different but the vast majority of men are not violent, rapists or criminal. The flawed used of statistics for propaganda is misandrist.

You mean over 99% of men ANLT
Are you seriously suggesting that it doesn't qualify in your mind as real male violence unless the woman ends up dead?
That is despicable.

You mean over 99% of men ANLT?

That was just a longer version of NAMALT so Feminists should shut up about male violence being the greatest human rights crisis the world has ever known.

Sorry, looks like I must've put the decimal point in wrong place.

However, two out of 32m is still a vanishingly small minority and we frequently see this 'two a week' statistic used an an excuse to trash men.

I'm a feminist but I'm not onboard with this and think it could perhaps even be an example of misandry in itself. There are many bad things (albeit not as bad) which I'm sure many more than 0.003% of UK women do. Can we use these to tar all women with the same brush, or demand that women in general assume responsibility for standing up and taking action, even when they themselves are not guilty?

What does that even mean?

What do that % of women do - that is worse than murder ?

Your figures are screwed anyway - there are 31m men in the country.

The figures you need to look at are - men commit 90% of overall crime, 88% of violent crime and 98% of sexual crime (which is mostly against women).

85,000 rapes occur each year (from home office statistics) and only 6% result in a criminal conviction.

One third of schoolgirls are sexually harassed in school (NEU study).

I've created an alternate username just to post this which I think speaks somewhat to the general reaction here towards those who disagree with the established viewpoint...

There are estimated to be around 3.2m men in the UK at present. If 104 (two a week) murder their spouses then this represents around 0.003% of UK men.

Even if this crime is disproportionately committed by men, I just can't but feel it's a bit of a stretch to use it as a beating stick against the other 99.997% of men who don't murder.

I'm a feminist but I'm not onboard with this and think it could perhaps even be an example of misandry in itself. There are many bad things (albeit not as bad) which I'm sure many more than 0.003% of UK women do. Can we use these to tar all women with the same brush, or demand that women in general assume responsibility for standing up and taking action, even when they themselves are not guilty?

Misogyny = male violence and exploitative behaviour towards women and girls

Misandry = women calling this out

Exactly this.

Given the things men in general do to women, frankly it's a study in cognitive dissonance that we don't hate all men.
I sometimes wonder at my ability to put the facts aside and love the men I know, given the overwhelming evidence how much men (in general) hate and despise us.
And I hate that I have come to this conclusion, and wish I was a lot more ignorant.

Does this mean you are going to stop claiming that NAMALT every time women talk about male violence?

larrygrylls Sun 25-Feb-18 13:34:13
I have, however, produced evidence suggesting that the FWR boards are misandrist. Clearly people will draw their own conclusions which, given the bias, will say they are not (despite many actual posts describing hating men (the dictionary definition of misandry)).