Can men really grasp women’s reality re safety?

[Ritascornershop]

I have a 19 year old son who is very compassionate and left-wing (I mention that as he’s been indoctrinated in TWAW) but who can’t grasp the discomfort many women feel at men in women’s private spaces.

And recently a friend was telling me that a family member of his (who he has quite the blind spot over) broke up with his girlfriend. The gf had, before she met his family member, been sexually assaulted. She was naturally quite traumatized by the rape but trying to heal and met this guy and got in a relationship with him. The way my friend tells it. his family member broke up with her after a few months (during an argument) & family member “got so uoset” he punched a hole in the wall and broke a chair. She called the police and called friends. My friend seemed to feel she over-reacted! I think any woman would be frightened and that a woman who’d been sexually assaulted would be particularly terrified.

It does not seem a tricky concept to me, but both these men seem to not be able to wrap their heads around how frightening it can be to be vulnerable around larger, stronger, angry males. Is this something most men don’t get or are these two not trying very hard?

@deydododatdodontdeydo

I agree that some blokes do get started on when minding their own business. But most fights going on between males are due to aggressive escalation. Especially when drink is involved . And I think the point we are trying to make is that the reason men are 4xs more likey to be assulted is because they are more violent. If we only counted the men that were attacked through no provocation then it would very unlikely be 4xs higher.

I am, I think, as women go, at the more confident end of the spectrum wrt to stranger danger. (not necessarily rightly - I just go with my feelings and I've had a lot of luck in the outside world I guess - my nastiest lucky escapes have been with men I know.) This means that I often leave parties etc at night alone and sometimes get a lot of concern.

What is interesting about this is that while there are some decent men who are good friends who are honestly being nice and putting themselves out by offering to walk you somewhere (and then walk back to the party), there are also the constant opportunists, newly met, who see this as a good way to get closer to you. I don't mean rape or assault you; I just mean that the vulnerability they ascribe to you allows them to lean in socially; even if they don't actually offer to walk you somewhere (why would I trust them?) they can make a demonstrative fuss about thinking you precious and special, offer to get you a cab, maybe get your number ("call me when you get home, please!") etc. None of this costs them a thing (unlike the real friend who is prepared to walk out in the cold with you, and back alone) but they benefit, they believe, as if they have actually done something gentlemanly, by appearing to give a shit. Note this. note this benefit to anyone who can, at absolutely no cost to themselves, appear to decry danger to women and therefore, the benefit of danger to women. It's minor. But it's there.

I agree that some blokes do get started on when minding their own business. But most fights going on between males are due to aggressive escalation.

But we're talking about assaults, not fights.

I think a lot of women don't understand the reality that men face. It's easy to talk about 'toxic masculinity', but recognising it as a concept doesn't release men from it's grasp. For example, our society still views male dominance as a desirable trait - some will disagree but it's literally as entrenched as misogyny.

Look on dating sites. Most women want a guy taller than them, and many want somebody to 'sweep me off my feet', or the old classic 'a knight in shining armour (not a prat in tinfoil)'. One of women's most common sexual fantasies in studies is 'being dominated'.

And then there's the media. Stoic, physically powerful, mentally strong, masculine men. Tom Hardy, Jason Statham, Vin Diesel, The Rock, James Bond, etc etc. And before them, the Arnold Schwarzenegger's and Sylvester Stallone's. A weedy accountant never saved the day, and if he did it was probably a satire.

Men often get beaten up whilst trying to 'save face' - a difficult predicament as they'll also become a target if they don't try and stand up for themselves. A typical example might be the teen who talks back to the bully to save face in front of his peers, but then gets beaten up outside the school gates (sometimes even stabbed) as the bully also can't lose face. The victim just wanted to be left alone but couldn't 'back down' or it would just continue with him now being an 'easy target'.

Similar situation when a man walks down the street with his girlfriend and somebody shouts 'don't fancy yours, mate' or 'show us your tits, love'. It's often a group of lads looking for a reaction, and they'll often get it as the man doesn't want to look weak in front of his girlfriend. All he has to do is say 'piss off' or look at them the wrong way and his head is getting used as a football.

My friend is a doorman and tells me that a lot of trouble starts with the girlfriend saying 'what are you going to do about it....you're not going to let him say that, are you?'

I'm as firm a believer in women's rights as any, but it seems that many women are woefully blind to the environment that men live in, which is a constant power play of dominance.

I think there are key significant differences between attacks on men and sexual assaults on women

Firstly by separating women we can make it safer for half the population at little cost except to some male egos ( males who would like to commit harm )

And secondly, it is almost impossible to get a conviction for sexual violence. In the case of a violent assault the bruises are taken as proof that an assault occurred, in rape cases it tends to be "he says ...she says" . Even if the woman is covered in bruises as has been reported today wrt the Cypress case. Where there are no bruises because the w9man hasn't tried t9 fight off the man, it's taken as evidence of consent ( see today's online guardian report on the secret family courts )

Then people tend to assume the woman must have been lying or there would be a conviction, and after all he's such a nice bloke and she was drinking/flirting/existing

I think that many women are concerned that patriarchy hurts many men with its narrow sterotypes

So you might find many women supporting say male mental health initiatives, support boys who want to dress differently or play with dolls . We may /often talk about how best to bring up boys to be good men. We may disagree on how much this is a feminist activity.

But on the whole, women are not in a position of power. And feminism is focussed on helping women, b cause at the end of the day women seem to suffer a lot more at the hands of patriarchy than men do. At least you get respect when you speak, a better salary, a health service that is more attuned to Male bodies

There is no reason why there isn't a "masculism" movement which is driven primarily by men, because after all they know what affects them better than any woman can. Such a movement could work with the feminist movement where there is overlap, but don't expect women to do it for you, we are too busy doing the ironing.

Sexual assaults/rapes are a huge problem and I just don't know how it'll ever be solved as evidence is key and people don't usually have CCTV in their bedrooms.

That said, there's also a bit of a backlash against the college rape culture situation in the US where the authorities had to step in as universities were apparently effectively holding kangaroo courts and dismissing students/ruining their professional lives without provable due process. Sadly, a side effect of this may be that people become sceptical which isn't great for genuine victims.

The whole Betsy DeVos conundrum seems to be feeding into all this.

So you might find many women supporting say male mental health initiatives, support boys who want to dress differently or play with dolls . We may/often talk about how best to bring up boys to be good men.

I wholeheartedly support this, but the issue I feel is that boys are effectively still on their own when they face the bulky at the school gates. Those that manage to 'solve' the problem with physical violence ('give him a black eye and he'll never pick on you again') might sadly continue in life with the understanding that 'fighting fire with fire' is the best method, thus perpetuating toxic masculinity.

Why don't you ask mnhq to set up a masculism board and aim to get together a group of likeminded individuals.

Then you come up with ideas start to take the steps to solve those problems? Like feminism but for men? Otherwise it does sound a bit whiny "but what about the men"

There are good reasons why women don't want feminism to centre men. It's because a lot of the day to day issues are different and despite us being bolshy feminsits, we know our priorities would get overlooked and overruled .

I am also interested in climate change, but ( except where it collided with feminism) I keep it to the relevant boards,

authorities had to step in as universities were apparently effectively holding kangaroo courts and dismissing students/ruining their professional lives without provable due process.

Can you expand on this?

There are good reasons why women don't want feminism to centre men. It's because a lot of the day to day issues are different and despite us being bolshy feminsits, we know our priorities would get overlooked and overruled.

I'm not suggesting feminism centres men, but men are arguably the biggest root of women's problems, so we can't just discuss women in a vacuum.

Can you expand on this?

Borrowed from a previous thread.

Currently, OCR guidelines direct colleges to apply a preponderance-of-evidence—that is, 50.01 percent—standard of proof in assigning guilt, and the “guidance” warns that if schools don’t go after these cases aggressively enough, they risk losing federal funds. Though it later quietly backtracked, OCR in 2013 even endorsed as a “blueprint” a remarkably broad definition of actionable sexual harassment—including even speech that “would not be offensive to an ‘objectively reasonable person of the same gender in the same situation.’” In 2014, the agency told colleges to “ensure that steps to accord any due process rights do not restrict or unnecessarily delay the protections provided by Title IX to the complainant.” Johnson and Taylor document the result—dozens of chilling examples of colleges and universities abandoning due process in favor of publicly punishing alleged malefactors.

At Middlebury, investigators were taught to “‘start by believing’ the accuser,” who should always be called a “victim” or “survivor,” and told that “a sexual assault investigation is ‘not the time for ‘just the facts.’’” At Ohio State, officials refused to agree under oath that they had an obligation to adjudicate sexual-assault cases correctly; one administrator claimed that her responsibility to “support students at Ohio State” did not include “an obligation to make sure that the hearing panel gets it right.” With OCR’s “quasi-dictatorial” support, college administrators have been all too eager to convict and punish students, while denying them the basic legal protections afforded by the criminal-justice system—rights as fundamental as that of cross-examining one’s accusers.

www.city-journal.org/html/campus-kangaroo-courts-15033.html

Men or patriarchy? I distinguish between the two. Not all men support the patriarchy but all men benefit from it. So for me feminism is about tackling patriarchy in the long term and abstract sense, and supporting women directly in the here and now sense. Because having a focus is essential if you want change to happen

If you want a group to tackle patriarchy and male issues, it's not feminism

It's like...climate change is more likely to harm women than men but we don't focus on climate change. We focus on the women.

college rape culture situation in the US where the authorities had to step in as universities were apparently effectively holding kangaroo courts and dismissing students/ruining their professional lives without provable due process.

That's interesting. Last time I looked, fewer than one-third of perpetrators found culpable by college investigations were expelled.

But I feel sometimes it becomes too 'abstract' and effectively just amounts to aimless complaining (not aiming that at you specifically).

Dismantling toxic masculinity requires an understanding of it, and whilst it's not unreasonable to say that men should be the ones to lead this, there's also the problem that they have less incentive than us to change the patriarchy.

Yeah I don't think US college campus rape culture means what you think it means.

That's interesting. Last time I looked, fewer than one-third of perpetrators found culpable by college investigations were expelled.

Well, that may arguably be related to the above. If they claim to have 'no obligation to make sure that the hearing panel gets it right' and admit that it's 'not just about the facts', then they're likely going to end up in hot water if the expelled student sues.

Wonderful derailing though, with the world's tiniest violin playing in the background.

Poor,poor men . Apparently all the violence stats, all the danger, all the toxic masculinity etc is not quite enough and they have less incentive than women to fight against patriarchy, despite the effects on them . That speaks volumes.

Surely you should know by now that every thread on women must be derailed by “but what about the men” cries?

But any attempt to discuss how men fit into it is derailed by cries of WATM.

Men will only change through awareness and 'poor menz' diatribes is unlikely to start a productive dialogue.

Why should the average non-violent man give a shit about people who don't care about his sex being the principle victims of said issue (violence)?

It's not like the average bloke is the one responsible, despite people trying to group all men into some collectively responsible group.

So male suicide rates,conviction rates ,assault statistics etc aren't enough awareness?

More needs to be done to raise awareness? By whom? How?

Considering that quite a few men use those stats to either shut up or blame women or feminism for it.

Poor,poor men . Apparently all the violence stats, all the danger, all the toxic masculinity etc is not quite enough and they have less incentive than women to fight against patriarchy, despite the effects on them . That speaks volumes.

By lumping men together, it's easy to obfuscate the fact that the rich white men with the power aren't the ones who are most hurt by the patriarchy - homeless, suicidal men etc.

By using class analysis, you could conclude that a group of nine homeless men and a billionaire is a more privileged group than ten female execs each earning £100k, because the first group has more overall wealth.

That doesn't sound lik class analysis. The class bit missing. What determines those people form distinct classes?

Oh I just reread the thread title. It's can men understand women's issue, not the other way around.