Anyone want to translate or explain this to me

[Trulywonderful]

Can someone explain what he means by this?

I can't work out if this is a him problem or a me problem

If think this is him being an arse but maybe I am misunderstanding his words

Gender violence could be violence against women

Gender violence sounds so much....less....than sexual violence, doesn't it?

It's a him problem.

Rape. He's talking about the many rapes by Hamas terrorists on 7/10.

You see I thought that first but is he saying it this way because men were reportedly raped too

Like I said this is confusing me

Yes it definitely sounds like a much lesser thing said like this

I don't get why he didn't say sexual violence

I thought he said it as there were reported rapes of men as well as women.

I think some violence included things like shooting women soldiers in the crotch, fucking horrible and gender-based but not sure if it counts as sexual assault.

He's sanitising it.

Rape is rape, whether a man or a woman is raped. Sexual assault is sexual assault.

Unless he is just trying to avoid saying women of course

As in he doesn't want to misgender the rapists or the women

Frankly like I say this has confused me a little.

My first thought why isn't he saying rapes?

Then, is he trying to avoid mentioning male sexual violence?

Then, maybe he doesn't want to mention genders because of the whole don't presume peoples gender thing?

I seriously am very confused about his wording. Though obviously I do understand what he is trying to say. I don't get why he has chosen to say it like this. What was his motive or thoughts for this wording?

I hate terms like “gender based violence” when it’s violence by men against women and girls.

In this case, as men were also raped, then sexual violence would be the appropriate term to use.

Every time the word ‘gender’ is used when it should be sex, my respect for whoever says it, drops.

Rape is sexual violence. Shooting people in the genitals is sexual violence.

I agree it all sounds a bit vague and sanitary.

Director General of the WHO. FFS.

Although more than willing to accept some men just dont get it, but anyone who has any contact with what is known as the VAWG sector will know that for a number of years even those working for rape crisis or women's aid regularly talk about gender based violence.

I am not even sure many of them are that aware that it is a total corruption of their purpose to support women who have suffered violence because of their sex.

Gender based violence sounds like someone getting up set that someone doesn't dress or behave in a gender conforming was.

Even the International Day for the Elimination of Violence Against Women (you can read the original founding principles) is now "celebrated" by not only institutions but women's groups and campaigns as being against "gender based" violence.

A lot of this dilution of reporting about women specific violence or health or whatever, started to be undermindes when news outlets agreed to a "house style" that replaced the word sex with gender, maybe as much as 20 years ago.

It was only when there was the big campaign to object to the attempt to make the GRA closer to self ID etc., that I first reaslised how gradually it had happened.

As we know over the years words and usages change.

But I suspect that getting the media (which then means most of the population) to substitute gender for sex may just have been as a result of active campaigning by certain groups.

We do really have years of women's rights including accurate language being distorted that need to be returned to what it should be.

Appalling ‘reports’ = people have said this but it’s horrible and I don’t want to think it is really true or as bad as they say

‘gender violence’ = don’t want to say ‘sex-based’ because ‘sex’ shouldn’t be said out loud

’gender violence’ = drank the kool-aid and don’t believe in biology and don’t want to offend TRAs (or be harassed by them for using the phrase ‘sex-based’

’gender violence’ = doesn’t sound as bad/scary/real as ‘rape and sexual torture’

‘gender violence’ = don’t want to say ‘sex-based’ because ‘sex’ shouldn’t be said out loud

I dont think this is or has ever been the case.

After all we had the Sex Discrimination Act and the offence of sexual violence. And it started to change long before young people had to have trigger warnings before anything was said or stated.

The use of the word gender is a political one, an indication of how long and how sucessful the TRA campaign has been.

Whilst I agree it is probably not the case in the context, in general I would respectfully disagree.

In the late 00s, I worked for a large international financial services company. The HR department was writing a document that referenced the upcoming Equality Act. There was a debate whether to refer to sex (as per the act) or gender (because it was more polite).

The people having this debate were not that much older than me (40s). I don’t recall which was used in the final version.

I remember websites back then changing from “sex” to “gender” and naively believing it was because it was more polite, but on one where I was an admin, it became apparent fairly soon that more changes were being requested that made it clear (with hindsight) that the request was actually driven by transactivism. It went from male/female to M/F/prefer not to say and then changed again so you could add what you liked.

I don’t think this was ever just an innocent change, even if some of those who drove it were not aware of where it originated. Business people (especially HR) tend to jump onto trends and bandwagons in a way that (I believe) didn’t occur so much before the internet. That has made this kind of thing so much easier to propagate.

Gender or gendered also once used to mean a power hierarchy based on gender roles - gender power was a way of analysing patriarchy.

In the OP's quote, I suspect that it is a way of sanitising the rape of Israeli women by Hamas men. Also at issue is the wishy-washy 'reports' when we know that for a fact the Israeli women were sexually assaulted, raped, killed and their bodies defiled by Hamas men.

Have been thinking about this and concluded that it's an attempt, deliberate or not, to obscure what actually happened. Gender violence could be anything from being misgendered (because, y'know, literal violence). Sexual violence....well, it's brutally obvious what THAT is.

See YetAnotherSpartacus has made the same point in a different way. Apols, didn't read that before posting.

I think we were saying similar but in different ways. I didn’t pick up the minimisation angle re misgendering.

Just to restate what I said yesterday but in a slightly different way.

I dont think the use of the word gendered violence in talking about the events on 7 October, it is just that now everyone talks like this, not just news reporters, but institutions, funders, etc..

Not forgetting that it has been happening for so many years, young people have grown up thinking it is the norm.

In fact as a challenge, can anyone find a recent news report that refers to sexual violence, or sex discrimination. Another indicator that if Parliament was able to pass a law that used the word sex, I dont think there was ever anything about people being prudish that bought about the change. It was a campaign by TRAs and some of us only noticed too late.

So most of what we are doing is in fact undoing the damage of the trans priority changes that have been taking hold in all spheres.

I don't think it was prudishness that led to the change, but fashion and politeness did have a role as I remember it. There are also key terms that don't sound quite right if you use the word 'sex'. The 'sex pay gap' or 'sex quotas' could be taken to mean something entirely different, for instance. There might have been better alternatives of course, but I don't think the implications of using the term gender were predicted back in the 90s and early noughties when the EOC (responsible for monitoring the Sex Discrimination Act) was regularly using it. None of the gender identity bollox was thought to be on the horizon and we were all being kind to the tiny number of troubled transsexuals, though never really seeing them as actual women that faced the same barriers, obstacles and discrimination as anyone biologically female.

We were also naive about potential risks and possibly a bit too focussed on our own right-on credentials to give the impact on more vulnerable or marginalised girls and women, or observant women of faith, much consideration. I think we inadvertently left the gate open and the big push from TRAs didn't really come until 2014-15.

In Wales we have a government focused on gender equality, gender-based violence and gender quotas for the Senedd. Incoherent though it is, they really do seem to mean 'gender identity' and not actual sex as the salient factor in discrimination, violence and abuse. In 2015 women's organisations in Wales fought back against plans to call violence against women and girls 'gender-based violence' in the domestic abuse that was going through the Senedd. Now those same organisations aren't just rolling over and using the term 'gender based violence'. They're actually cheerleading for the TRAs and joining in with the silencing of grassroots women's voices.