Nearly every mass killer is a man. Why aren’t we talking about that?

[CircleSquareCircleSquare]

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/apr/26/mass-killer-toronto-attack-man-men?

“After the Toronto attack, there should be a debate about toxic masculinity, and the issues of identity and rage that turn so many men towards violence”

I don’t dare to read the comments.

You just compared the wholesale rape, murder and oppression of potentially half the planet to people cheating in sport.

It’s not a good analogy is it? It’s NAMALT. Again. And yes, it’s derailing.

Babel

What are you talking about? Larry was comparing the nature of the act, not it's severity. As a comparison, it served the purpose of his point pretty well.

Disagreement is not derailment.

So we have had derailment accusations and personal attacks.

I'm waiting for the term 'sealion' to start getting thrown around and we have a full house.

You just compared the wholesale rape, murder and oppression of potentially half the planet to people cheating in sport

Men are violent and start wars

But the upside is we have sport

Yay

That's certainly how i read it

Happy to believe that larry just wasn't explaining it very well

I do agree with the socialism he was on about though

Did i miss the personal attacks

Dammit i always miss those

Could someone either point them out or better still repost

Please and thank you

No he directly said That yes Male violence existed BUT.... I thought that one was a teensy bit on the side of minimising and apologism.

Yes the socialisation being a layer on top has been discussed prior. I think we’ve agreed on that. Just wondering if you’d like to expound your sport analogy to any of the lassies from Chibok...

This is exactly what we mean when we say men dont understand the problem. Just like I’m sure I’m oblivious to plenty of racism, not by deliberately ignoring it, just being it not being my lived experience. I can well imagine why the author listed upthread doesn’t talk to white people about race. She must feel like she’s whacking her head against concrete.

The vast majority of men are brought up and educated not to be violent.
As I have repeatedly said, male violence is a pathology, not the norm.

In a society where violence is glorified it becomes the norm. You even used a competitive sport analogy that illustrates that glorifying violence is the norm.
However, the overwhelming assumption on here is that the greater prevalence of violence in men than women is somehow caused by socialisation and the 'patriarchy'. And that if men somehow 'tackled' male violence, it would all go away and everyone would live happily ever after.

This statement is so dishonest that I have quoted it so that it can hang there dripping with denial.

I'm struggling to understand your point larry? Is it that we must have testosterone so violence is just a side effect we have to put up with?

Spaghetti,

On a species level, yes.

I am saying that statistically there will always be a small proportion of violent men (and an even smaller proportion of violent women).

That is not an excuse for violence, but an acceptance of reality. Nor does it mean that violent people should not be punished.

It's not a small proportion though, is it? Two women a week are killed and 85,000+ women are raped in the UK alone, not to mention the others who don't report and the still others who are subject to domestic violence, stalking, child abuse, coercive control etc etc. Practically every single woman in the world is subject to some sort of threat or violence from a man at some point in their lives.

And the idea that educated men aren't violent is such utter nonsense I don't know how you believe it. No one group of men commits more rape than another - in fact most of the high profile cases of rape in the news recently were carried out by well-educated professional men.

It’s not a small proportion though really, is it? and the damage done is certainly disproportionate.

We are sentient creatures. We have control of our actions. 3.6 billion women on the planet manage to commit only 2% of the violent crime. To say that violence is an inevitable side effect of there being men is unacceptable to me.

Women manage to control ourselves. Why don’t we hold men to the same standards?

In short: it’s inevitable? Not fucking good enough.

If men's violence is inevitable due to how ridiculously hormonal and out of control they are, shouldn't men's movements be restricted, for the safety of the people around them? I mean, women are the ones who are restricted at the moment but that doesn't really make sense does it?

As I have repeatedly said, male violence is a pathology, not the norm.

Yes, but the values and attitudes that when taken to their extreme lead to male violence are the norm.

As the late Golda Meir said when told she should put a curfew in place on women after a series of rapes:

“But it’s the men who are attacking the women. If there’s to be a curfew, let the men stay at home, not the women.”

The problem with saying it’s inevitable is that it is excusing it. It’s not namin the problem and saying it’s unacceptable. It’s an extension of boys will be boys.

With the exception of specific mental states, out legal system holds adults culpable for their actions. The only acceptable level of violence is nil. Are we really saying that men can’t control themselves as well as women can?

Domestic violence is ubiquitous across all levels of society, only there is a greater sense of shame about it the higher up you go so women tend to shut up and suffer in silence more.

I don't think we have to 'put up' with anything! We're the human race, don't like the rain? Build a house. Want to get about faster? Here's the wheel. Your welcome. We can innovate the crap out of anything no reason violence can't be any different.

That said I'm still stuck at the class analysis thing, if we are examining the problem of violence we need to examine the subset of humanity that have the descriptor 'violent'. It is of course crucial to ask why are more men violent than compared to women. However the answer could just easily be the 15% size/strength differential between men and women. Thus those who do have a physical advantage are more likely to use it.

The number of women who do abuse tend to do it to those weaker than them. In addition a quick look at domestic violence stats show women are at similar risk of DV in same sex relationships if not more so, although the risk posed by a much larger man is obvs greater.

I'd be happy to target men for anger management as in a world of finite resources that is where you'd get the most bang for your buck.

Nope,

Our legal system is right to punish violent offenders harshly.

I am saying crime is inevitable. It does not excuse it. You are making a (false) nexus from my posts that I have been clear to say is not the case.

It's hardly inevitable if testosterone causes it, is it? We know the cause, so why not deal with it?

Ok if we take the standpoint that violent crime is inevitable (at our current dire levels of social progress anyway) why is 98% of it done by men?

If a woman really wants to be violent she can be. Guns don’t take much strength to shoot. Yet in societies that have strength levelling weapons widespread, it’s still men doing most of the crime.

You’re still trying to make the point that you as an individual Are not violent. We get that. Now why are men as a class so violent? Try to look past the implication that you personally are at fault. Why are men so violent?

Apparently it's testosterone Bowl. Which begs the question - if testosterone causes such destruction and suffering shouldn't we do something about it?

Every experience in life tells you men are more violent. It's innate.

The most successful movies, video games have violence throughout. Violence, be it legal, organised, fiction or illegal is everywhere. It's mostly consumed by and committed by men.

Muhammad Ali and Mike Tyson are sporting legends. Predominantly due to their ability to knock other men unconscious.

Most men arent violent but they consume violence happily.

Reduction of testosterone in transgender males does not decrease their violent activities so obviously the assertions larry makes is clearly false.

It's hardly inevitable if testosterone causes it, is it? We know the cause, so why not deal with it?

Apparently it's testosterone Bowl. Which begs the question - if testosterone causes such destruction and suffering shouldn't we do something about it?

Er, because you can’t go round forcibly medicalising people!

The only thing you can do is mitigate the socialising factors that make it worse.

I think it’s more complex than ‘just’ testosterone or ‘just’ socialisation.

What I see is a complex mix of biology and society, creating feedback loops that reinforce or reduce existing behaviour patterns in the individual.
And then on top of that, the tone of society as a whole acts to modulate what is and is not acceptable. And the law reacts - often in an inadequate manner, which sets the tone further.

That last level - the way society and the law condones or frowns on behaviour sets is very important. Because I think that is the level that really makes a substantial difference to women’s lives and I think that’s whats changed over the past twenty or so years. In a climate where violence is glamourised in media and pop culture and crucially, NOT punished adequately by the courts, savaged in the media or condemned by society, those individuals get bolder.
The rise of the web as way of connecting people who would otherwise have held an ideology alone is also important.

The media for example: the first DM headline I saw on the news stands was along the lines of ‘man does awful thing, kills ten, in rampage sparked by rejection by woman. as if she was to blame.

The courts for example: a woman in a trial near us had her case dismissed. Her husband had beaten her and financially abused her over a period of years. Apparently she should have ‘asked his family to stop him as that was the cultural norm.’

When attitudes like that prevail, it isn’t trivial. It sets the tone, the framework through which society perceived violence and the value of women and girls.

This is not a problem that can be solved on one level. The current trend for blaming women for everything and glamourising violence, in the media, in porn, in pop culture, has to change. If we can create a legal system that actually punishes violent men properly, a media that calls the problem out and examines it WITHOUT all the NAMALTing bollocks we’ve seen on this thread, and reign in the accessibility of abusince porn, we might stand a chance of getting somewhere.