There will be no progress until we name the problem

[TinyRick]

worldnewstrust.com/there-will-be-no-progress-until-we-name-the-problem-mickey-z

AIBU to think this article should be shared far and wide?

There is a real problem with Male Violence being swept under the carpet and not addressed fully on news sites and papers.

If we don't say what it actually plainly is then we can't address the real problem.

be nice to see more musicians do this

This link mentions another band.

Architects singer halts gig after woman is groped - www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/articles/40986123

So upset....typed out a reply, took me bloody ages and then the website went funny and Iost it all

If I can muster the energy to type it out again I will.... although having a crappy week so not sure I will

Abso please do, I have been following the thread and was checking back in to look for your response. The discussion is really interesting.

Sorry you've had a bad week.

Aw thank you Laza I felt really nervous coming back as I feel like posters are just waiting to pounce and rip everything I write to shreads... I feel like often on MN threads turn into echo chambers and anyone with a slightly different view just gets rounded upon and crucified.

I will try my best to remember what I wrote before because I was actually quite pleased with how I had ordered my thoughts! Anyway...

Firstly let me clarify that I am NOT saying that the maternal relationship is the only and main cause of male violence! I do not believe it to be so. I have also not said that women who work are to blame. What I am trying to say is that the maternal relationship is crucial in the first few years (not just weeks/months) for setting up the neurological pathways necessary for frontal lobe processing (higher order processing like empathy and altruism).

I have not once said that fathers do not play a very important role here too. I do not intend to sound like I have "obliterated" the role of the father. I wholeheartedly agree that men should and need to take a more active role in the nurturing of and raising of their children.

But I do believe that as mammals, the primary relationship with the mother is the most crucial. (I will explain more in a min, and touch on the breastfeeding thing too).

I also firmly believe that the way that society is and has always been male dominated creates the patriarchal and mysogynistic environment which further fuels male violence.

The main reason for male violence is that I think, males are more violent.

www.google.com/amp/s/www.psychologytoday.com/blog/homo-aggressivus/201409/male-aggression%3famp

This is why males have always dominated societies throughout the ages. I don't think we can say for sure that males are more violent now than they have ever been when you consider the worlds history of violent crusades, war, genoside, imperialism etc.

But I am not saying that to say "oh well, men can't help it, it's in their nature". But I do think we should consider the theory that the most obvious reason that males commit more violence is that they are more violent in nature.

I also agree with the poster who said that male violence is probably not a homogenous problem and the solutions are likely to be more nuanced than a one size fits all solution. The causes of domestic abuse in the uk are unlikely to be the same as rape as a weapon of war in Africa for example. (Although I would come back to my point about the common denominator here being that males are more violent).

So how does this relates to my points on mothers??

What I am trying to say about the crucial role of mothers is that infants need this nurturing relationship in order to develop properly. In order for optimum brain development. In order to have the neurological capacity in the first place for compassion, empathy and altruism. (See my earlier point about criminal psychopaths and how they can never be rehabilitated - they literally do not posses the neurological connections required for remorse and empathy. They are brain damaged. It's like telling someone without a thyroid gland to stop taking thyroxin medication and produce it themselves... they literally do not have the bodily capacity for it).

www.google.com/amp/s/www.psychologytoday.com/blog/ethical-wisdom/201104/the-meeting-eyes-love-how-empathy-is-born-in-us%3famp

I think when we minimize the role of the mother, when we say that "anyone else" can do just as good a job and that FOR EXAMPLE things like the act of breastfeeding are merely providing "food" for the baby we miss out on some of the core components of what makes the mother-infant relationship so unique. (I am NOT saying that breastfeeding is the ONLY way that mothers provide a unique role in their relationship it was in fact another poster who brought up BF by saying it was the only thing a mother could do that a father couldn't - thus showing my point about the way that the maternal relationship is minimized/downplayed).

When we say things as a society that infants can be cared for effectively by 'anyone' we are I think, denying that extra/unique/special thing that a mother provides. Like I said before, we are mammals. We are carrying mammals with an extremely prolonged infancy compared to other primates. This is hardwired into our physiology through millennia of evolution.

Please read points 1, 3 and 19.
cosleeping.nd.edu/frequently-asked-questions/#Q19
(Dr McKenna has over 20 years of scientific research into infant sleep)

If you are interested in how maternal and paternal relationships shape male views on mysogyny then this book has an excellent chapter about how dysfunctional and toxic relationships manifest in mysogynistic attitudes.

www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0553381415/ref=sxts_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1503202697&sr=1&pi=AC_SX236_SY340_QL65&tag=mumsnetforum-21

Perhaps my theories only apply to Western societies. I do not have experience of living in developing countries (only brief visits).... but I believe that the mysogynistic and patriarchal societies we live in (male dominated due to the fact that males are and have always been more dominant and violent - a self fulfilling prophecy if you will) creates a toxic and reinforcing environment (through processes like male/female socialisation). This also helps to explain why girls from abusive childhoods usually grow up to be victims and boys to be violent.

I'm NOT saying that women simply need to love men more and that will cancel out their capacity for violence.

Of course we need to do this:

Society has to change the way it socialises boys, come down like a ton of bricks on violent crime of any sort, treat women as full equals and have them present in all positions of power, name the problem as it exists. Every time a crime is committed by a man it should be named as male violence.

But I'm saying that the maternal relationship in the critical first few years plays an important role in tackling the problem.

Absofrigginlootly

Haven't read what you've written above yet so this isn't in response.

But if you write something out and then you lose it, that's an absolute killer! If you're on a phone, every few paragraphs you can highlight what you've written and copy it, so if it does disappear (which happens to me) you can just paste it back again.

It will include links as well.

There's nothing worse than typing the most eloquent, persuasive text ever, only for it to disappear!

... always do it just before you press post, because that's when it's most likely to scew up.

Absofrigginlootly

I'm not a scientist, but so far, from your first link, two things have jumped out to me. The role of testosterone. In a recent study of rapists, the presence of T was not found to be anyway heightened. It was completely random. Secondly the fact that men are bigger. That would imply that women would be just as violent, but towards smaller women, which is not the case.
Also the assumption that men are conditioned to violence from their pre-history role. I believe this has been completed debunked and that in fact, it was a far more egalitarian society pre-6000 years ago.

After reading your second link, out of interest I googled 'profile of violent men'. This article says the exact opposite.

That men brought up in a female dominated house become hyper masculine as a result. They also report being very close to their mother! I haven't read the full article yet but it implies that it is fathers who are culpable, not mothers.

Among other issues, their upbringing is characterised by instability. Due to their father's abandonment, and leaving them in poverty. Make role modelling plays its part.

books.google.co.uk/books?id=qObabPbmEgIC&pg=PA63&lpg=PA63&dq=background+profiles+of+violent+men&source=bl&ots=vjQXoKmicN&sig=1pswFeJ1T92kSJMtskz2s3hyHF0&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjm4t_mkOXVAhVRbFAKHeA1ClQQ6AEIMDAC#v=onepage&q=background%20profiles%20of%20violent%20men&f=false

I'm not saying that your theory is incorrect. but in my experience, particularly with studies about violence, these remain theories. Because there doesn't seem to be any one common denominator.

Understanding the basis for male violence is fine. And should continue. But given the society we live in, rather than the society we would like to live in, deterrent is going to play a huge part in this.

Whether men are predisposed to violence, or whether it is due to a lack of bonding, they still have a decision to make.

As a society, we need to make that decision very hard indeed. At the moment, it isn't.

The fact that there is a significant cohort of men - maybe even the majority(?!) - who are not violent, who are not aggressive, and are quite easily capable of living their lives in the same way as women, gives lie to this idea that violence from men is just something we need to accept.

It is not.

Men do not need to be violent. Violence is not men's default behaviour - at all. Men are perfectly capable of not being violent, and of not exerting their authority physically.

We know this to be utterly true.

We just need to start expecting it from all men.

Why are very few women violent? Even those who are physically bigger and stronger than other women?

Why are the vast majority of violent acts committed by men?

Why are many men not violent?

Thank you

I think the answers lie around about between all these points.

As I started reading Absofrigginlootly's post, I immediately thought about the cosleeping study. However, then I think about the gender research, BBC prog this week, but also this one, in which neither Dr Alice Roberts or Dr Michael Moseley can agree, the first saying it's social influence, the other saying the evidence points to gender stereotypes in genes. Actually I'm leaning more towards society but then I remember there are simply more boys in SEN settings than girls. There does seem to be a difference.

I think prior to puberty, all that happens to the child impacts those neural pathways. The media they see, the social interactions they experience, the labels they internalise and the social interactions they witness. I wonder if small boys have too many 'tough' expectations put on them and so the positive effects of cosleeping counter acts / undoes this rather than correct a genetic issue.

I have taught a child so damaged by lack of nurture, his later diagnosis of ADHD and asd couldn't really be pinned on his genes or what had happened to him. At the same time, I've seen others thrive in the right environment, undoing the bad that's been done early on. Every child is an individual, we do have a range of brain types, we are not all the same because of both nature and then nurture.

I think beyond puberty there is an issue in that men are generally physically stronger and taller. This is an advantage if you have a desire to dominate. So this added to all that's gone before, all the lack of emotional intelligence, high expectations of being tough, seeing women objectified in the media or around them and you lay more foundations for the potential for violence. I honestly feel this is a society wide issue, generations of habit (in those who are violent) and a severe lack of understanding and self awareness in society as a whole.

^ painting a picture of where it goes wrong, completely acknowledging that many men are simply not violent. But I feel this proves the point that it's a social issue.

It unquestioningly (in my mind) is a societal issue.

The fact that many, many men are not violent just proves it.

If it were innate, then all men would be violent.

@Absofrigginlootly, I'm not just debunking everything you've said because I'm part of an echo chamber, although I have seen that can happen on mumsnet. And yes, the nurturing from the mother is impressed, although as an adoptive mum the emphasis on breastfeeding is a tad insulting as I have created a lovely bond with my DDs without that. Yes there's a loss but I don't think it's particularly because of a lack of breastfeeding, as there are a lot of formula fed birth children who do just fine.

If you consider what SeedingGrass has said, there is extreme male violence where she comes from and I expect most of the men were breastfed and nurtured by their mothers. I think the issue is that boys are taught all through their early lives that girls are inferior to men and girl babies are unwanted. It's something I've seen over and over again when reading Central Asian women's stories as well.

Sadly these values are perpetuated by women too as by the time they become mothers-in-law, they have been indoctrinated to believe that's how things have to be. (FGM being the prime example once again.)

So yes the mother's role is very important, but it has to be seen alongside how she is treated within the home, that models for boys their view of the world.

"Why should innocent men be expected to take the blame just because they are men?"

Why are Muslim leaders expected to speak out to condemn terror attacks after they've been committed in the name of Islam?

Sorry, I see the conversation has moved on somewhat. Do ignore me

But Abso the research you point out on co sleeping and brain development (specifically point number 3) indicates it does not have to be the mother who is responsible for this; ' caregiver...usually (but not always or necessarily) the mother'.

Actually my DH feels shame at the way a lot of other men behave towards women. If men don't speak out against male violence then no progress will be made.

We also need to move beyond the shame attached to the women who have suffered, and I'm thinking again of SeedingGrass and what she's said, but victim shaming does happen in this country too.

"What are we saying to a boy told to “man up” or to “act like a man”?

Often, we’re saying, “Stop expressing those feelings.” And if a boy hears that enough, it actually starts to sound uncannily like, “Stop feeling those feelings.”

It sounds like this: “Pain, guilt, grief, fear, anxiety: these are not appropriate emotions for a boy because they will be unacceptable emotions for a man. Your feelings will become someone else’s problem – your mother’s problem, your girlfriend’s problem, your wife’s problem. If it has to come out at all, let it come out as anger. You’re allowed to be angry. It’s boyish and man-like to be angry.”

From Robert Webb's new memoir, copies from the guardian extracts.

Trigger warning - Extreme violence

I tend to stay away from follow ups as it can be upsetting for me. My dad lost all of his family except his father during India/Pakistan partition. Violent men - ordinary beings not trained for this purpose. Unknown men killed all his family. In 1984, our family was caught up again in religious riots, we witnessed and lived through total destruction - more killings, houses and schools burnt. Ordinary men - hate filled violence but not women, they manage to stay at home - only men come out. The man who used to pick/drop us from school brought the mob to our house because he knew what religion we were.

Imagine given a packet of red chilli powder each to a young child and nothing else to protect yourself and whatever cash and jewellery my parents had, they tied under a drain in a cloth and said we should take it should they not survive. One of the neighbours risked his life to lie to them that our family left few days ago and put a lock on the outside gate and we survived. Lived with no lights on for about 5-7 days in pin drop silence to hide our presence. I don't remember any of it but my elder siblings do. We lost everything in those riots - dad's business, my mother's job, our house and had to start all over again in a new city, led to years of poverty.

After going through so much, we join 21st century and the internet age and things are looking better. In youth, you protect yourself from sexual assaults. I knew the rules so managed that part okay. When you are the age of getting married, society tells you your life will be rosy when you get a husband and kids. But you find that you were going to be no princess but a free slave for the family. They want younger brides as it's easier to break their spirit - officially called 'adjustment and mixing into their family'. You get love and form relationships but there is always an undertone of supremacy from the husband and his family. Inequality at home was the least violent episode, I thought I was stronger but emotions really good to me and I lost hope for happiness too soon. My in-laws weren't too bad but because of my past, I couldn't take even slight injustice. They probably feel that they have been wronged.

I'm not from a poor family, an average middle class family caught up in bad stuff accidentally one too many times. I get lots of verbal abuse from fellow countrymen on how great their lives have been and I'm happy for them.
I have heard and seen all sorts of violence from male population. The only exception that I have seen from women is when they are from the husband's family, who become a man's extension at that point and hence abuse you. I wouldn't miss this world if I die today. Sorry if I don't reply as I don't want to give more information and is upsetting. But violence from men is real. World has become a better place as compared to the past and I hope it keeps improving.

I think we are all saying the same thing though aren't we? That factors like socialisation play a huge role in the influence of male violence?

My talk about maternal and paternal relationships fits in with this, because it is part of the socialisation (nurture) aspect.

My comments about the 'nature' side (talking about a possible male predisposition for violence) is a way to explain why a lot of males are violent - In the 'nature vs nurture' interplay.

Of course lots of men grow up not to be violent. I'm not saying it's a predetermined destiny. As a society let's look into the reasons why these men are not.

Mittens I don't mean to offend you as an adoptive mother about my comments about breastfeeding - I feel like greater emphasis has been placed on it as I was drawn into a discussion about it. Obviously it's just one aspect of the maternal relationship- I never said it was the most important. As an adoptive mother surely you can see better than anyone the negative effects of early trauma in regards to dysfunctional maternal and paternal relationships. And see the healing value in your now loving a nurturing relationship with your children?

*loving and nurturing

@Absofrigginlootly, I definitely do see the effect of trauma and the healing value of nurture. But this is also true of my DH, he is able to do that too, as well as me. They adore their daddy. And there's the important role that my DDs' foster carers played in their first year before they came to us.

So yes and no, would be my answer. Basically not just from me! But obviously what I do as a SAHM has an impact, but it isn't because I'm a mum, it would work if my DH was a SAHD.

Thank you for your kind words though.

Maybe in males who are not violent the nurturing maternal and paternal relationships provides a buffer against the negative messages received during wider socialisation.

Hasnt it been shown in criminals that they overwhelmingly come from unstable backgrounds?

That is true, I think it's because they've learned the criminal behaviour from the environment in which they have grown up. No doubt the nature vs nurture debate will continue.