Looking at men differently now I know too much?

Just like your ‘women commit more abuse’ but failing to state that they commit more neglect cases and not violence or sexual ones.

Actually, the majority of studies conducted in the last 50 years have found women to be more likely to commit DV than men. Including the biggest metastudy to date which analysed over 10,000 previous studies and extracted the data from 1,400 peer reviewed studies - it was called the 'Partner Abuse State of Knowledge' and was conducted by over 100 academics from about 20 universities in UK/US/Canada alongside various DV charities/organisations. However, men are still more likely to kill their partner.

It's only gov/crime statistics that repeatedly show men to commit vastly more. It's an odd contradiction but a possible explanation is that all the DV charities state that men are far less likely to report abuse, usually for fear of being separated from their kids or seen as weak. And also the fact that up until recently they were often told "sorry, there's no support services in your area". Mankind state that their research indicates that men are 2.4x less likely to report abuse.

I believe that the latest government figure is that women commit 42% of DV so it's not too much of a leap to think it may be much higher if men genuinely don't report as much. Certainly I observe that men don't like to admit weakness. And several studies have found that women commit 70% of non-reciprocal DV (the most common pattern being bi-directional).

I'll concede that self reported statistics/anonymous surveys can be a bit flaky, but when you have thousands of them over five decades they start to paint a picture. And oddly you get a higher level of female perpetration if you ask women than if you ask men, which would suggest Mankind are right about men being reticent to report. For clarity, more women will admit to hitting their partners than men will admit to having been abused.

Either way, it speaks volumes to me that there are all these studies with conclusions that contradict the usual narrative and yet nobody is discussing them. It's almost like people are closed minded in this area.

If you had actual statistics showing that Muslims are nine times more likely to be religious extremists than, say, Christians, then your arguments would make sense.

Islamic terrorism makes up 75% of MI5's caseload and constitutes around 70% of terrorism attacks in this country since 2018. They identity it as the biggest terrorist threat to national security. And of course the vast majority of terrorism attacks are against innocent civilians, often children as with the Manchester Arena bombing.

This is in contrast with the most common DV dynamic being bi-directional violence (i.e. both partners technically being abusers, even if hitting your husband doesn't warrant being murdered in return).

Sky News did a truthfinding investigation into Nigel Farage's claims and found that Afghan males are 'only' 3x more likely to commit a sexual offence than British males. Yet the woke are furiously pushing back against anybody that mentions this and calling them gammons.

It's clear to me that a lot of people are very selective with their outrage. I see a lot of similarities with those that unconditionally hate men and those that unconditionally hate immigrants/non white people.

But the question remains. How is femicide one of society's biggest issues (according to feminists) yet men are considered to lead privileged lives by the same people despite comprising 70% of murder victims?

I’m not sure you do. You’re definitely manipulating them though to suit your cool girl narrative. Just like your ‘women commit more abuse’ but failing to state that they commit more neglect cases and not violence or sexual ones. I’ve luckily never had to state a preference but I’m sure one would rather be neglected by their mother than raped and murdered by their dad/uncle etc etc. Then we had your sea lioning poster state ‘abuse is abuse’! Well crime is crime, but there’s a big difference between nicking a mars bar and murdering someone. Both are criminal acts though right?

Dogs kills approx 25000 plus worldwide. What is the figure for how many men kill worldwide? Little bit more than that. Yes other men too. Still suggests men are the problem.

Recognising risk and statistics doesn’t mean let’s blanket ban men (or dogs and coconuts if we take into account that toe curling example). You should consider patterns and learn about the most basic of safeguarding measures though to tackle such risks. Recognising men as I previously stated and stand by - the more cuntier sex class - doesn’t mean women are cowering in their houses not able to leave the house. Stats exist for a reason. Maybe spend less time ogling your poor bloke colleague’s arse and more time not dismissing the daily experiences of women at the hands of problematic men (who still manage to function daily).

If you had actual statistics showing that Muslims are nine times more likely to be religious extremists than, say, Christians, then your arguments would make sense.

When we are talking about the sexed difference in prevalence between male violence and female violence, we aren't talking a couple of percentage points, we are talking vast differences.

better to try and not let any hateful rhetoric affect you negatively

When my line manager pulled me from the site and wouldn't let me return, that wasn't at my request. It was because:

• he had no authority to have the sexually-explicit graffiti removed and its authors reprimanded, because we were employed by the client directly, not by the construction company;
• he had a legal duty towards me to take all reasonable steps to protect me from sexual harassment, and "sexual harassment" includes seeing sexually-explicit graffiti;
• the authors of the graffiti were probably still working on-site and had demonstrated, by writing the graffiti, that they could not be trusted not to sexually harass (or worse) an unaccompanied woman, which meant that I could not be allowed to walk out to the portaloo without an escort from my own team;
• there was a risk that any complaint he made about the graffiti would provoke victimisation, either against me as the underlying reason for his complaint, or against him for having made the complaint.

Pretending I couldn't see the graphic descriptions of how a tradie wanted to bend an admin worker over her desk wasn't going to help me here. My line manager could not allow me to get in a lift with that written on the wall every day, nor allow me to walk unescorted through a half-finished building where its authors worked.

And more to the point, women shouldn't have to pretend they haven't seen that kind of thing just to do their jobs.

Are one third of men subjected to sexual assault during their lives? Because one third of women are subjected to sexual assault. One seventh will be subjected to DV. Does marriage pose a one in seven risk of violent assault to men? That's the kind of statistics I'm looking at: a very substantial minority of women being hurt by men, usually men that we know. Women put at elevated risk of male violence by doing completely normal everyday things like getting married, dating a man, or living with a man

My number one strategy for staying safe from male violence is to basically adopt a South Korean 4B lifestyle: no dating; no sex; no marriage; no children. I'd have spared myself two rapes and an abusive relationship if I'd done this a lot lot sooner. But that wouldn't have kept Train Man's hand off my arse, nor two older boys hands off my vulva at primary school.

My general feelings towards men aren't based on online reports, rather personal experiences. The frequent stories out there only confirm that I'm not some rare case. I've experienced abuse and rapes. By people known to me and strangers. I shared a flat with a lovely man who turned out to be a serial rapist and murderer in his spare time. I never saw that coming. More recently, I've discovered that multiple male friends and acquaintances have rather shitty attitudes towards women and frequently use prostitutes. This has changed the way I see them and I've distanced myself.
Of course there will be many wonderful men out there but I have no idea which ones they are, and I'm not prepared to risk meeting any more seemingly lovely violent creeps.

Strictly speaking I think it's better to try and not let any hateful rhetoric affect you negatively, although of course that's easier said than done sometimes. I'm a woman working in the sector usually considered the most sexist and yet I'm able to do what you claim you couldn't. So I speak from experience.

I don't have any experience of being a WOC so I'm not going to pretend to be an authority on that or dismiss people's lived experience, like posters who've never worked in construction seem to be dismissing my lived experience.

But to play the game, why don't I ever hear the woke/feminists saying that ordinary Muslims are part of the problem if they don't challenge the radical ones? Why aren't female Muslims considered complicit in FGM? Would you consider it OK to voice the opinion that not all Jews are bigots but the majority are?

If not, why is it OK to apply these principles to sex but not race/religion?

I'm not sure you really grasp how statistics relate to everyday life. As per my earlier example, dogs kill 30,000 people a year whilst I'm not sure cats kill any. You could use your logic to argue that dog ownership should be banned. But really it's a non issue, aside from occasional spikes in dangerous breeds like the XL bully, which still don't prevent women from going about their lives.

If one man and six women are killed annually by a falling coconut, women are 600% more likely to be killed by coconuts. Does this mean coconuts are a grievous threat to our existence?

Yes, men commit the majority of violent offences (mostly against other men) and the vast majority of sexual offences. This doesn't mean you can't live your life without worrying about men daily. In fact, if male violence is such an issue then how do men manage to live such a privileged life? We're told that femicide is one of society's biggest issues, yet 70% of murder victims are male and men are twice as likely to be attacked by a stranger.

How do ordinary men manage to function given that they suffer much more of this male violence that seems to be the scourge of female existence? We need to study them and learn their secrets!

Maybe to say that its premise is (largely) invalid!!

Galadriel was telling someone not to compare sexist graffiti to racist graffiti. The person doing the comparison was setting up an analogy. Using analogies is OK.

I saw that article @clingfilmed and it made me think of this thread. Absolutely sick. The men who are supposed to be the partners are the rapists and enable others to rape too. Absolutely sick.

Why did you join the thread then, when its entire premise is invalid?

Speaking of our negative experiences with men is not claiming to be the most persecuted minority. First, it's not a contest. Women, POC, disabled people, LGB, etc all have their own experiences of discrimination or negative treatment. One does not cancel out or diminish the others.

Second, not all of us are white or middle class.

This seems to be another strawman some here are using to shut women up. Oh no! How dare we say anything negative about men, even when we are talking about our own experiences.

My point is that it isn't valid to make generalities about anyone!

I refer to my point above! 😀

So when women describe their experience of being women and generalise it to their sex, pointing out that they understand what it's "like to be a woman" in a way that men don't, do they have a right to do that?
Or are women, like men, just completely isolated individuals who have no more authority about their sex than someone of the opposite sex does?

To which I would add that the whole premise of this thread is a generalisation about "men". Is the idea that it's valid to make such generalisations about the opposite sex, who you have no subjective experience in common with, but not valid to make them about your own, based on the subjective experience you do share?

None of those points contradict what @GaIadriel was saying.

How so?

What you mean is that no one person can know what it's like to be any other person. There may be generalities and similarities, but you cannot claim to speak for all men.

Being literal fucking royalty didn't protect Mary Queen of Scots from abduction, rape, and pregnancy. Rapists, and the risk of forced pregnancy that they weaponise against women, are a hazard to all women regardless of race.

Every single man who catcalls or gropes or writes pornographic descriptions of what qhe'd like to do to a female colleagie on the inside of a lift is reminding the women who see and experience that that we are the rapeable class.

There is nothing wrong with resorting to an analogy to get that point across when the person you are replying to is refusing to recognise that men as a sex class oppress women as a sex class through rape and the fear of rape, and that sexual harassment, which is what that pornographic graffiti was, is part of maintaining that fear of rape.

You appear to be speaking for everyone.

So when women describe their experience of being women and generalise it to their sex, pointing out that they understand what it's "like to be a woman" in a way that men don't, do they have a right to do that?

Or are women, like men, just completely isolated individuals who have no more authority about their sex than someone of the opposite sex does?

I refer to my point above:

What I do know, from years of experience and reflection, is that women can NEVER understand what's it's like to be a man, sexually.

We can only tell you how it is for us. It's up to you what you do with that information, and you can of course "refuse to believe" the reports of personal experience from people different from yourself if dealing with the extent of their difference would be too challenging for you.

horrible man with a respectable front. Hidden in plain sight. His ex wife is so brave.