Supporting male victims of crimes considered VAWG

[yellowtwo]

Is it right to use the term Violence Against Women and Girls (VAWG) to refer to men too? I don't agree with it at all, why not VAMB?
I understand they want to raise awareness that males can be and are victims of crimes such as rape and sexual assault, but it this the right way to do it?

www.gov.uk/government/publications/supporting-male-victims-of-crimes-considered-violence-against-women-and-girls

I’m not saying it’s right but I think I’m reality it would put men and boys off of reporting. It’s already seen a certain way of men and boys report rape (again I don’t agree with that, just saying how it is) if it is also classified as violence against women and girls surely hardly any male victims will come forward?

It should be categorised as sexual violence subcategory: male or subcategory: female surely?

Also surely there are different support pathways depending on the sex of the victim, the sex of the perpetrator and the type of violence? So it needs to be recorded properly for signposting alone.

What a weird approach. The statistics about the crimes affecting men and boys are significant on that report, I don’t see how conflating them with VAWG helps anyone. For example, I didn’t know crimes like honour based crimes affected men and boys too, surely the government should be shining more light on these and not disguising them as VAWG.

I'm struggling to read the document as I keep thinking they are talking about male perpetrators committing the violence against women and girls. It is a strange term to use for men when it has women and girls in it. Surely they could have used a new term once they had established they are looking at the types of violence that mainly affect women and girls but if course men can be victims of similar crimes.
It really does seem to muddy the water. As always language matters.
They state something about the Equality Act and treating equal but it seems very disingenuous to day the violence us like for like and makes the whole thing sound ridiculous. Perhaps if they were clearer and stated crimes like women and girls suffer. Men and women's bodies are different and how they can be assaulted are different.
It is very confusing language.

I thought that too Marathoninjury that it might put boys and men off reporting if it's seen as a 'women' issue, which defeats the purpose of using the term MVAWAG to be inclusive of males.

It says in that report the majority of domestic homicides the suspect was a family member or friend, for female domestic homicides I thought the majority of suspects are intimate partners, these are very different aren't they and need different approaches.

*Apologies, the suspect (just under 60%) in male domestic homicide was a parent or other family member

Also what happens about funding? Eg there are separate charities for male victims of rape to contact and female victims of rape to contact. Will the stats show there are only rapes perpetrated on female victims as they’re counted as VAWG? So funding for males victims will decrease?

I don’t know enough about how crimes are recorded and stats work etc, just a thought off the top of my head about potential issues.

I agree, wrongly many men still feel shame about reporting abuse (I know some women do too but in this context talking about men), and it is more taboo for them to talk about with friends and family- being lumped in with a service for women and girls I think for many would reinforce that hesitancy. There are also different considerations I think and different support is relevant, it seems like an attempt to just assume all abuse is equal no matter who it is against which isn't true. There should be more targeted support for men, and women's should continue to be improved as well- just not together.

I saw a Twitter thread on this where a male victim of domestic violence was appealing for men to demonstrate against a VAWG conference in Wales because they weren't including men. Most tweeters simply asked why was he not organising his own conference, instead of calling on a load of men to harass abused women. His replies did not show him in a good light.
Sorry have forgotten his Twitter name.

@334bu

I saw a Twitter thread on this where a male victim of domestic violence was appealing for men to demonstrate against a VAWG conference in Wales because they weren't including men. Most tweeters simply asked why was he not organising his own conference, instead of calling on a load of men to harass abused women. His replies did not show him in a good light. Sorry have forgotten his Twitter name.

This isn't surprising, taking away all of the safe spaces for women and ignoring what would be the more effective solution is common place for some. Thankfully a minority albeit a vocal one, comments seem to be realising how ridiculous it is.

How does it help boys and men to join VAWG when they don't speak out and need support groups that understand their particular needs?

Even if trans identifying, they need support relevant to their needs (e.g. male refuges).

334bu This kind of situation was my concern when I read the report, that MRAs and misogynists would use it to target feminist organisations to insist men are included.

I once looked at similar data for another country where these concerns were brought up. The clear majority of suspected perpetrators of the abuse men and boys experienced were male (aged father abused by son, fathers abusing their minor children, including sons etc.)

Thus, if we look at the situation from the angle of the perpetrator, the problem is largely a male one. Overall, the focus should be on the kinds of dominance relationships which various cultures accept but which do create the groundwork for domestic violence (possibly affecting different generations in an extended family), intimate partner violence (including that between same-sex partners), and child abuse (including refusing children agency in deciding on their own romantic partners or spouses).

I still think that it is important to keep in mind the outcomes of these types of violence which are usually more severe for women and girls (visible in murder statistics).

Ye gods!

We, DV centre, refuge, for women, often get enquiries for men who are victims of DV. Because we have been around longer, most agencies are aware of us, have contact details for us. We pass on details of the male DV centre a couple if miles away.

We work with them to raise their profile with said agencies. We give them part of our funding, because we wouldn't get it if we didn't include men in our provision. We work with them, buy we do not share facilities, we are both single sex facilities. I bet you can guess which if us gets the hassle for not being inclusive enough!

We all know that the vast majority of DV perpetrators are male. We also know that male victims need different services, support than female victims do. Very different. And they definitely need more clear signposting to services.

But not formally through female services. Passing on contact data is one thing. This seems to be insisting that our services can never be single sex. We will always need to include male services at some level or other.

Ludicrous. So I am hoping I misread it!

They should have an Ending VAWG strategy, and an Ending Gender Based Violence strategy that supports male victims.

@Liveliferun

What a weird approach. The statistics about the crimes affecting men and boys are significant on that report, I don’t see how conflating them with VAWG helps anyone. For example, I didn’t know crimes like honour based crimes affected men and boys too, surely the government should be shining more light on these and not disguising them as VAWG.

Yes.

Anything not useful to people born male is irrelevant, pointless, naughty, wrong, and either should recant its sins or be destroyed.

Misogyny on crack.

VAWG is awareness raising specifically for female people. If awareness raising is needed for male people go set it up and stop commandeering whatever women have set up for themselves.

It's like the endless whingers we used to get here about 'how dare MN set up a place for mothers without setting up dadsnet?' a) they have, it's a desert of low engagement. b) if you want something, go set it up and stop wailing for mummy to drop everything and spoon feed you from her own plate.

What a strange idea. I find it quite distasteful. I think it’s because it makes the definition of woman “someone who (sexual) violence is done unto”. Doesn’t help male victims, doesn’t help female victims so far as I can see.

Maybe I am on high alert because of the push to make everything gender netural, but MVAWAG isn't gender neutral that's the point. Maybe it's worth an FOI to see who came up with this idea? It's always a slow drip drip, the possibility down the line if this becomes common place is sharing of resources, and crisis centers and so on.