Where's The Horror About Violence Against Men?
Including intimate partner violence? Of which there's plenty.
Wendy McElroy writes at The Daily Caller about VAWA -- the Violence Against Women Act -- "which determines federal and funding policy on sexual violence."
McElroy notes a curious thing, in respect to Native Americans:
Native American women is a core issue in the Act. The section "Safety for Indian Women" cites a stunning statistic from a National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey entitled "Violence Against American Indian and Alaska Native Women and Men." It states, "More than 4 in 5 American Indian and Alaska Native women, or 84.3 percent, have experienced violence in their lifetime."There is a curious omission in the VAWA citation, however. A statistic appears immediately after the 84.3 percent one. It is: "More than 4 in 5 American Indian and Alaska Native men (81.6 percent) have experienced violence in their lifetime." That is only 2.7 percent less violence experienced by men than by women. A few lines later, the survey reports that "55.5 percent" of women and "43.2 percent" of men "have experienced physical violence by an intimate partner." Those figures differ by 12.3 percent.
The omission highlights an objection that has been associated with VAWA since its inception in 1994. What about male victims? In this specific case, where are the Native American men? The title of the Act provides an answer: the Violence Against Women Act. Male victims of violence are not a concern addressed by the bill. Why not?
Gordon E. Finley, Professor of Psychology at Florida International University explains, "While ... VAWA claims to fairly protect all victims of domestic violence, in reality it intentionally discriminates against about half of the victims -- men ... Social science research literature is unambiguously clear. Domestic violence is initiated about equally by men and women; slightly more women than men are physically harmed, but men nonetheless still represent more than 40 percent" of victims.
In short, the Act benefits one class of victims while ignoring or blaming another class because VAWA is based on an ideological model, "which falsely presumes" that all sexual violence is perpetrated by males. The injustice of this presumption can be grasped by imagining a bill named the Violence Against White Women Act that excludes women of other races; it would cause outrage. It should cause outrage. Why is it less egregious to exclude victims on the basis of sex?
McElroy nails it with her ending:
Everyone deserves to be protected against violence -- women and men. People who show compassion for only one class of victim are not anti-violence; they are advocates of that particular class.Any legislation that benefits one gender at the expense of another or one race at the expense of another is invalid on its face, and it should be rejected. VAWA is an insult to men and to women who value fairness.
Where's the horror? It's out there somewhere; it's just hard to hear over the cheers of approval.
dee nile at December 11, 2018 4:38 AM
Here's why this issue isn't addressed -
Reaction To Women Abusing Men In Public
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CRCS6GGhIRc
Snoopy at December 11, 2018 4:49 AM
Evolved mental firmware - women are to be protected; men are to be left to their own devices.
Snoopy at December 11, 2018 4:50 AM
Men rarely ask for help when they need it because people find their weakness disgusting.
And a guy in a bad place doesn't need to be mocked.
Men rarely open up because it usually backfires for them.
We haven't really evolved to humanise men with the compassion we do others.
https://twitter.com/TellYourSonThis/status/1072398862076338176
Snoopy at December 11, 2018 5:09 AM
It probably isn't intentional but when you post things with these headlines it makes it sound like you're belittling the problems these women face and brushing it off.
What about a headline like, "9/10 Ethnic group X men get beaten up by age 21"? Why make it, "Why do people care about women"? why mention the women at all?
If you care about violence against men do something about it, don't get mad because other people's pet issue is violence against women or pets or trees or whatever. No one is stopping you from starting a foundation to help them.
NicoleK at December 11, 2018 7:32 AM
So, on its face VAWA is unconstitutional?
Further, how is interpersonal relationships in any way, shape, or form a concern of FedGov?
I R A Darth Aggie at December 11, 2018 7:45 AM
1) Violence against anyone is not the business of the fed gov (to answer Darth Aggie).
2) The new VAWA proposes to criminalize manipulation, put-downs, verbal abuse. This is nuts. If enforced objectively women would be far more guilty than men of verbal abuse.
3) The presumption of the bill is that women are helpless. hah
4) Assault is already illegal everywhere so the bill and its predecessor are simply grand-standing.
5) Men can suffer from physical assault and have no recourse in the courts--if they call cops it is the man who gets arrested.
6) The constant refrain from women that they want men to be more open about their feelings is simply false in the real world. Wives view any feelings of their husband about sadness or defeat or worry as disgusting and unacceptable. It causes wives anxiety if their husband is weak. They will dump him. For a man, success (or at least lack of failure) is absolutely essential.
cc at December 11, 2018 8:33 AM
I've written here before about my former co-worker who murdered her husband in cold blood, because he was planning to divorce her. She was released on parole after serving five years. And because the divorce was not final, she inherited most of his estate.
Cousin Dave at December 11, 2018 11:05 AM
Australian/American political commentator Sydney Watson critiques one-sided government Aussie TV campaigns.
https://youtu.be/hkhq13TVRGc
David Chisholm at December 11, 2018 8:07 PM
My growing antipathy toward women generally is largely fueled by the realization that most women are perfectly happy to scarf up all the societal goodies, leaving men with nothing. VAWA is the perfect example. That many women have sons who will suffer for their callousness toward men is only proof of depravity.
Maybe women can't help themselves, but we should all at least recognize the reality of the situation. Forewarned is forearmed, to some extent at least.
You, NicoleK, exemplify the problem.
Jay R at December 12, 2018 2:05 PM
I'm not sure what NicoleK said to set you off, Jay. She is simply pointing out that sometimes, it pays for us men to take up a particular banner. Besides, from your point-of-view, wouldn't you find it better to advocate for male victims of violence without women mucking about in it?
mpetrie98 at December 12, 2018 8:22 PM
Leave a comment