The problem with "#NotAllMen"

[TheABC]

I read this on the BBC and it beautifully sums up the doublethink problem women face in society.

*"...some people are keen to point out that it's a tiny minority of men who are attackers - using the hashtag #NotAllMen.

"The issue with the argument is that women can't win," says Daisy.

"They want women to not treat all men as potential attackers, but then we also are asked to keep ourselves safe.

"Keeping ourselves safe means that we have to see everyone as potential attackers because if we were to say, 'OK, not all men, we will treat everyone as innocent until proven guilty", that's when these things happen.

"And that's when people say, she should have been more careful.

"So it's really tough, because I think it's an attitude that's really built into society."*

Is she (and I) being unreasonable?

Every woman lives with a curfew embedded in her psyche. When it's dark out, watch out, do you really need to go out? How about a curfew for violent men? That would make me feel safer.

@LolaSmiles

It wasn't white lives matter too though was it. It was all lives matter It was All Lives Matter, because some people were very very much triggered by the discussion of systemic racism and the disproportionate number of black people being murdered that they couldn't resist saying "but whatabout the white people... why is nobody talking about the white people... white people matter too... I think you'll find ALL lives matter"

Let's not derail, but that is very different to not all men.

'Not all men' is not perfectly valid. It allows men who have never murdered anyone or raped a stranger to leave their behaviour unexamined.

Sexual assault and rape within relationships is normal. Watching women being degraded and assaulted in porn is normal, watching trafficked and underage women being raped in porn is normal. It is only a matter of weeks since pornhub removed such content. Going to a lap dancing clubs or a red light district on a 'boys' holiday is normal.

NAMALT exists so that a huge section of men can carry on doing the above without feeling uncomfortable.

Let's not derail, but that is very different to not all men.
Same principle. Spotlight is on an issue and it's effect on a group of people and inevitably all the whataboutery starts from people determined to ensure that the focus is centred on the dominant group.

A spotlight is being shone on male violence towards women and there's a discussion about male violence.

Sure enough across several threads: 'yeah but not all men, but why do you all hate men... but women can be mean to men, but it's only advice to women to stay home to avoid being murdered... joking about men having a curfew is oh so upsetting for men.. NAMALT... look at all the misandry on here... did we mention that you shouldn't talk about men as a class because #notallmen... but whatabout men... but think of the men..."

@LolaSmiles

I'm not complaining about the fact that society is more sensitive to violence against women than it is to violence against men. There are probably good reasons for it. I'm more upset by violence against women than I am to violence against men myself. But this conflation of well meaning advice with victim blaming is rather tiresome. The police didn't say 'we're not going to bother investigating, we're just going to tell women to stay home'. And at no point did I hear anyone suggest that women would be to blame for anything that happened to them if they ignored that advice. Should women have to take precautions to avoid violence in the street? Ideally no, and in most cases there really isn't need for it because the risks are actually quite low. But I think people who get incensed by this type of advice, given in this very limited and specific set of circumstances are putting the desire to grind their own axes ahead of practical safety.

From a personal experience, I was told by the police in the middle of a court case with stalking, harassment, DV that they couldn't stop the man in question going to certain places because what about his human rights and it was me that was stay home. I'm encouraging it etc That was a sentence I was told by police when I was desperate for help to stop this man and his violence against me.

Sadly this experience or similar isn't in the minority
I feel it's experiences like this when you are told by the POLICE that a mans human rights are more important than your safety as a woman that fuels the anger from women on this issue.

And women are allowed to talk about that.

@Velvian

'Not all men' is not perfectly valid. It allows men who have never murdered anyone or raped a stranger to leave their behaviour unexamined.

Sexual assault and rape within relationships is normal. Watching women being degraded and assaulted in porn is normal, watching trafficked and underage women being raped in porn is normal. It is only a matter of weeks since pornhub removed such content. Going to a lap dancing clubs or a red light district on a 'boys' holiday is normal.

NAMALT exists so that a huge section of men can carry on doing the above without feeling uncomfortable.

Do you really think people are campaigning it's not all men so we can allow more men to rape and murder woman?

@LolaSmiles

Let's not derail, but that is very different to not all men. Same principle. Spotlight is on an issue and it's effect on a group of people and inevitably all the whataboutery starts from people determined to ensure that the focus is centred on the dominant group.

A spotlight is being shone on male violence towards women and there's a discussion about male violence.

Sure enough across several threads: 'yeah but not all men, but why do you all hate men... but women can be mean to men, but it's only advice to women to stay home to avoid being murdered... joking about men having a curfew is oh so upsetting for men.. NAMALT... look at all the misandry on here... did we mention that you shouldn't talk about men as a class because #notallmen... but whatabout men... but think of the men..."

But people are directly talking about the not all men campaign, people are allowed to have different opinions.

Posted on another thread and is food for thought

Women would be far safer if men were all out and not allowed to be at home, you and your children are far more likely to be assaulted /murdered / raped by your father / partner / sibling. This is the uncomfortable truth.

Please do not judge the thousands of officers who face danger on a daily basis
/ provide support / investigate horrific crimes on 1 male officer. It is not fair.

I am an officer, a mother, have also been a victim of abuse (which is why I joined the job to help other people)

The anti police rhetoric on Mumsnet is really distressing. You wound not judge all nurses on the actions of 1, would not judge all women on the actions of 1.

@Silenceisgolden20

From a personal experience, I was told by the police in the middle of a court case with stalking, harassment, DV that they couldn't stop the man in question going to certain places because what about his human rights and it was me that was stay home. I'm encouraging it etc That was a sentence I was told by police when I was desperate for help to stop this man and his violence against me.

Sadly this experience or similar isn't in the minority
I feel it's experiences like this when you are told by the POLICE that a mans human rights are more important than your safety as a woman that fuels the anger from women on this issue.

And women are allowed to talk about that.

They would tell you the same if you were a man suffering this behaviour from a man, a woman suffering it from a woman, or a man suffering it from a woman.

@oursurveysaid oh please do sod off

My experience is valid. It was a man that was violent against me. And that advice was just the tip of the iceberg of how i was treated by the police

Agreed.

I had an experience and was told I couldn't stop said persons female relative harassing .e in a public place.

@Silenceisgolden20

I'm sorry to hear about your experience, it sounds harrowing. I'm afraid I don't know enough about existing laws around harassment to comment intelligently on the specifics of your case. If such a thing doesn't already exist, then I would certainly be in favour of intermediate court orders that could be obtained in these circumstances that would prevent harassers from approaching your home, place of work etc... on pain of harsh punishment.

However, as a general principle, no one person's safety justifies the dismissal of the rights of another. The elimination of legal rights and protections would leave us all more vulnerable to abuse from the state, a far more powerful, and when unconstrained by legal and constitutional limits, dangerous, actor than any individual man or woman.

deep sigh

I would like to set the record straight. I do not hate men (I am married to one!). Nor do I think ALL men are abusive buggers out to hurt us.

However.

Society deflects the problem of male violence straight back onto women at every opportunity. We are damned if we do take precautions ("what do you mean you don't want a man walking behind you?") and damned if we don't ("well, she was out at 9pm at night and wearing heels. What did she expect?"). And, whilst more men are dying of violence than women, more women experience harassment, abuse and sexual violence than men. If the Home Office stats are to be believed, up to a quarter of us have suffered from it - that's approximately 8 million women. Even allowing for more than one victim per perpetrator and female-on-female violence, that's still a massive group of men. Its not a few thousand poisoning the barrel. Its millions and they are given permission to get away with it.

We can't solve a problem we did not instigate. But we can change social expectations and stop the fucking doublethink. We can stop the build-up and micro-aggressions because -surprise, surprise - most murderers don't start with killing. They build up to it.

That's what I want decent men to "get". Call out the male entitlement in the public space and listen when women are telling you something is wrong, instead of deflecting because "the guy is like me and I am sure she got it out of proportion", or "he didn't mean it".

No one deserves violence. Male or female, straight or gay, dress or trousers.

[quote PoklingtonP]@LolaSmiles

As a joke it's hardly the end of the world. I'm by no means convinced that it's always said in jest though. And no, women have not effectively been asked to follow a curfew, just advised to take sensible precautions in the presence of a known threat, advice which they are entirely entitled to ignore. The fact that this kind of advice is issued to women, rather than men, who we know are significantly more likely to be victims of violence, probably says something about our sensitivity to violence suffered by women when compared to that suffered by men.[/quote]
You absolutely must be joking. You clearly have absolutely no understanding whatsoever about the implicit limitations placed on women’s lives due to a threat that is not our fault or problem. Aside from my many experiences of sexual assault and rape, I have also been mugged whilst at university - the first response I got from the campus security guard was “why were you walking in the dark?”. It was 7pm, on a main road.

And I get that you don’t understand it because you aren’t a woman and don’t live this life. But you won’t even bloody listen.

But when I read such charming ideas on MN as curfews to be imposed on all men or young men should have their sperm stored for later in life and forcibly neutered, I can say with some confidence that I haven't done anything to deserve that.

What have I done to deserve not being able to walk alone at night? What have I done to be anxious about getting on the tube because of the sheer number of times a man has touched me inappropriately or shoved his crotch deliberately into my back?

Why is saying that men should be removed from the situation any more absurd than saying women should remove themselves? Just the suggestion that your life should be limited in the way our lives are limited has you crying unfairness. You have been brought up with freedom, and you believe you are entitled to it. Many of us have never experienced the sense of freedom you evidently take for granted. Why will you not listen to that?

ILoveMyMonkey

I haven’t read all the responses because quite frankly I’m sick of all the diatribe from people (men and women) on here who are “offended” and their go to response is not all men!
Instead I’m going to post a link to this guy: twitter.com/moxieswagger/status/1370484619783593984?s=21 it’s a really powerful message - he gets it! He gets why men have a huge responsibility and why most women feel the way they do. Men need to step up and listen, really and truly listen. end of!

I clicked on the link and watched it. It’s only part of what he is saying posted on Twitter. It doesn’t say who he is and I would like to see the rest of it. Do you know who he is? I think what he is saying is really important and relevant to this discussion.

@RootyT00t

Posted on another thread and is food for thought

Women would be far safer if men were all out and not allowed to be at home, you and your children are far more likely to be assaulted /murdered / raped by your father / partner / sibling. This is the uncomfortable truth.

Please do not judge the thousands of officers who face danger on a daily basis
/ provide support / investigate horrific crimes on 1 male officer. It is not fair.

I am an officer, a mother, have also been a victim of abuse (which is why I joined the job to help other people)

The anti police rhetoric on Mumsnet is really distressing. You wound not judge all nurses on the actions of 1, would not judge all women on the actions of 1.

So you really think the police are doing enough to keep the streets safe for women if they have to resort to advising large numbers of women to self-impose an effective curfew on themselves?

Because I don't.

This is not anti-police rhetoric it is pointing out failures of the police on a large scale to get to grips with a serious problem.

@RootyT00t

Agreed.

I had an experience and was told I couldn't stop said persons female relative harassing .e in a public place.

And had this woman raped you?

RootyT00t

The MET is institutionally racist many have spoken out about this (enquiries held) as they have about the sexism

If it’s true as reported in some of the media that Sarah Everard murderer also exposed himself and wasn’t suspended what judgement was that based on ?

That crime could and absolutely should put you of the sex offenders register yet for a policeman to do this wasn’t considered serious

[quote Silenceisgolden20]@oursurveysaid oh please do sod off

My experience is valid. It was a man that was violent against me. And that advice was just the tip of the iceberg of how i was treated by the police[/quote]
I am quite prepared to believe that everything you said is true. But the police and the courts are bound by the principle of innocent until proven guilty, and the sexes of you and your assailant are not relevant to your being told that his liberties cannot be forcibly compromised unless he is convicted.

@PoklingtonP
On pain of harsh punishment? What punishment is that then ? A restraining order they don't give a shit about.

@underperformingseal

Of course the sex is relevant. It's relevant to this discussion about male violence against women.

@Oceanbliss I’m really sorry I don’t. I saw it on Instagram then lost the post then came across it again on Twitter. Wish I knew as I’d also like to hear the rest.

I wrote about my experience to help explain why some women respond the way they do the these threads about 'what about the men'

And I mostly get responses that the sex is irrelevant.

I wouldn't have been posting on this thread if a woman had raped or was violent against me.
I was trying to say where some of this anger comes from in women. It comes from their experiences of how they have been treated by men.

But I don't want to add to this anymore.

Theunamedcat

"... a local mp has shared a status giving free self defence lessons to women she has been piled on by men and women insisting that men be allowed in to female only classes even she pointed out that women afraid of men will be unlikely to attend if men are allowed in "well they are just stupid because men who want to attack women won't be seen dead there" at a class full of vulnerable women all those lovely targets in one place i can't see an issue there at all"

That's appallingly.

When I did self defence for women we were told not to practice with the men in our lives because if they turned violent we would not be able to use the self defence moves on them.

I was 21 and learning self defence was really empowering. There were some younger girls in the class who heard fir the first time about male family members attacking young girls and were shocked. It has always stayed with me that learning about self defence is so important for females especially. Why is it so hard to see that a woman being attached by a male has an automatic strength and height disadvantage? It's not about special treatment for women it's about trying to level up a very unlevel 'playing' field.

It is just awful to me that even seeking to protect ourselves is politicised and that men would even wish to invade a women's self defence class; rather than organising their own fucking self-defence classes.