The votes are in, and the topic of the day is Domestic Violence Against Men.
This is one of the issues that I, personally, feel is important and a place where MRA’s and feminists would be natural allies. No one should be the victim of intimate violence, man or woman. And, I don’t think either side would disagree that a men who are victims of domestic violence are generally not believed, and are frequently the victims of ridicule, because of stupid and damaging gender stereotypes.
Where the difference seems to be is what the appropriate response should be. As near as I can tell, MRA’s think that they should get as much federal money as women from domestic violence shelters, and each battered woman shelter should have to either have to provide separate accommodations for battered men, or allow battered men into the shelters in the first place. Feminists say that this is impossible, and that MRA’s should start their own shelters. There is also quite a bit of talk that MRA’s are not being entirely honest with their motivations, and using men’s domestic violence as an excuse to shut down women’s shelters.*
For myself, I can see where either side is coming from. I shall not impugn the motive of MRAs, in general, although I do agree that there have been individuals with less-than-forthright motivations. But, the actions of a few should not be the focus of the discussion; people have been known to hijack legitimate topics for their own selfish use, something feminists should know about. This is an issue everyone should be concerned about.
However, I do tend to fall back on feminist position that this is not really our area of expertise. Battered women’s shelters have to be women-only: it would be far too easy for an abuser to follow his wife to a shelter, and pretend to be battered in an attempt to gain access to his wife. And battered women’s shelters generally do not have enough funds to meet their own need, much less the funds to build an entirely new building with different counselors.
The federal funds thing is tricky. I would be completely in favor of an equivalent amount of funding for battered men’s shelters as battered women’s shelters, but not equal. According to the Department of Justice women are 3 out of every 4 victims of domestic violence. Expecting 3/4ths of the victims to deal with half the funds is patently unfair when it comes to dealing with something as basic as safety. But, men’s shelters should be given 1/4th of the funds, to address their problem as well.
If MRA’s wished to set up more battered men’s shelters, I don’t know a single feminist who would oppose them. I would even be willing to donate to them, and I’m sure that already existing women’s shelters would be more than happy to give them advice on how to set one up. But at the end of the day, this is where feminists should be allies, not leaders. This is where feminists should lend a helping hand, but not do the heavy lifting.
*If I am misrepresenting anyone’s position, please feel free to correct it as necessary in the comments.
Ooops, posted on the wrong thread…
I realize the source may be disregarded…but it summarizes facts neatly. I invite you to check it out for yourself if you don’t believe it…
Yeah, male victims rate REAL high.
But women don’t do the bad things men do you say? It’s all in self-defense or for some other, non-abuser reason?
Not so much…
http://glennsacks.com/blog/?p=1417
Post from Factory, moved over here from the other thread because I think it belongs here:
I realize the source may be disregarded…but it summarizes facts neatly. I invite you to check it out for yourself if you don’t believe it…
Yeah, male victims rate REAL high.
Thanks Lisa. Now I’ve gone and “duplicated” it though…with a lil extra. Here’s more…
http://glennsacks.com/blog/?p=1818
Glenn’s blog is proving quite a good archive. There are links on all of these posts to the original.
“Perhaps it would be best if you discontinued participating in this discussion.”
Okey dokey.
I’ll add another element in here… it was alluded to earlier that the limited funds make it difficult to allocate more government funding to shelters for men without taking away funds for women’s shelters.
My though right away, which might be a bit too simplistic, is just for legislation to be introduced that would increase the funding for all shelters for victims of domestic violence. In other words, to borrow a quotation from the infamous South Park character Towelie, “I choose… both!”
The problem, of course, would be that some people would complain “oh noes! big government!” or “oh noes! Socialisms!” That said, would it be likely that people would find the cause of stopping domestic violence against all people to be worth a few extra cents of taxes?
By the way, I nor the non profit I founded is a “MRA, we are a domestic violence victims program run just like any other dv victims program with hardly any funding
95% of our volunteers are women.
But because we are such an anomaly no one gets it. So in response to this question (sorry I can’t find it again to say who wrote it):
“Say the feminists in your area said they were willing to advise interested parties on setting up a men’s-only shelter, help w/ fundraising, finding counselors and such. Would you accept such an offer?”
I say if battered women’s advocates wanted to advise us on setting up a men’s only shelter I would be mighty appreciative of their assistance IF they used the same guidelines for abused men as they do for abused women i.e. believe them unless they have reason (besides their own bias’) not to. Here in Maine the women’s advocates are not to keen on helping us. Could it be because of their coalition’s philosophy? Here it is:
“Women and children are being battered and abused. The Maine Coalition to End Domestic Violence believes violence in intimate relationships is supported and encouraged by our culture. The use of force or threat to achieve and maintain control is manifested in sexism, racism, homophobia, classism, anti-Semitism, able-bodyism, ageism, and other oppressions. All of our struggles against oppression are related.
Any woman could be battered. Our individual and collective success in overcoming oppression depends upon working together toward changing individual and institutional behaviors and societal attitudes that encourage the abuse of women and children.
We support equality in relationships and oppose the use of violence as a means of control over others. Women have the right to control their own lives. Support, information, and access to resources strengthen women’s control of their lives. In order to create a violence-free world, we must also recognize the needs of all children and include them in our struggle.”
CAVEAT (by Jan) unless those children are adolescent boys! They will take a pet “into shelter” here in Maine before they will take a 13 year old boy with his mother.
Don’t get me wrong not every battered women’s program is anti-male but a huge portion of them have been. This makes it really difficult for us to help men and children. I would like battered women’s advocates to “walk a mile in my shoes.” Come and answer our crisis-helpline for a month, maybe then you will see that male victims are not all that different from their female counterparts.
–
Jan Brown, Founder & Director
Domestic Abuse Helpline for Men and Women
http://www.dahmw.org
Participants Needed for Study on Abused Men!
Are you between 18 and 59 years old and has your current or former female partner
assaulted you one time in the past 12 mos?
Please participate in our survery: http://www.clarku.edu/faculty/dhines
Male Victims of Domestic Violence- an interview with Jan Brown, Founder of the Domestic Abuse Helpline for Men and Women (16.2 Mb) (link below)
http://www.brookhavenhospital.com/Jan Brown podcast.mp3
Ben said, “My though right away, which might be a bit too simplistic, is just for legislation to be introduced that would increase the funding for all shelters for victims of domestic violence.”
One problem, Senator Biden and his ilk are taking the VAWA (Violence Against Women’s Act…federal law that puts billions of $$ in the hands of dv programs, law enforcement agencies etc) “show” International…so little will be left for violence against men at home IMHO:
http://www.amnestyusa.org/violence-against-women/international-violence-against-women-act/page.do?id=1051201
Lisa, you never shoulda got on me about citations and sources n stuff.
Connecting feminist theory directly to the treatment of men in the DV system….tall order, but she does it. Not in this quote mind you, it’s a long read…but worth it.
http://www.law.fsu.edu/journals/lawreview/downloads/304/kelly.pdf
Of course I am critical of masculinity. I am also critical of femininity. As they currently exist, both are social constructs that cause significant harm. When you actually look at how our culture defines men, it’s pretty awful and really insulting to men’s existence as human beings, just as our definition of femininity constricts women’s roles and social place.
But to talk about the issue at hand, part of the problem that nobody is really addressing here is that for a shelter or other services to exist, there must be more than simply funding. Shelters in most places are founded by groups of volunteers who eventually scrape up enough funding to get a safe house and maybe pay some staff. They can apply for grants, but the process must be initiated by the organization and requires time and commitment from workers to make it happen.
Battered women’s shelters and other support initiatives have been founded on these principles by dedicated people who go far above and beyond to support victims of violence. They work for wages that are often half or less of what they could make in the private sector or in government jobs, but they choose their work out of dedication and many of them volunteer a lot of hours on top of their paid time. And contrary to what some may think, most of the women I know who do anti-violence work are not wealthy and do not have partners who pay all the bills. They make a lot of personal sacrifices to be where they are. I know the extra 35k per year I could make in the private sector would definitely change life around my house.
For men’s shelters to come into existence, it will take a similar effort and sacrifice on the part of men who want to see it happen. Granting bodies give money to organizations that take the initiative. Now, if an organization was refused funding on the basis that it only served men, that would certainly be grounds for legal action. But in our case, we find much the opposite. Most funding bodies want us to show that our services are accessible to everyone regardless of gender, age, sexual orientation, religion, socio-economic status, race, and so on.
I simply do not buy the argument that the only reason men’s shelters and men’s services around DV do not exist is because there’s no money for them. Until recent years, the same held true for women’s services, yet they existed nonetheless because people believed they had to exist, so they made it happen. If there is a need for those services for men, people need to stand up and create them.
And for the record, my partner is a man who has survived DV. I know it happens to men and I care very deeply about how violence affects male survivors. But I think that people who want to see services for men have to actually do the grunt work of putting them together rather than demanding that someone else magically make it happen.
Lisa, in an earlier comment (“Updated info on DV…”) you quoted some intimate partner violence stats from the U.S. Department of Justice. Thanks for the links. I’ve been trying to make some sense of their data and its origins and interpretation. It’s very different from the raw data I’m looking at.
For example, the figures you quote imply that 75% of domestic violence homicide victims are female and only 25% are male. I’m looking at data from Coroners and Medical Examiners (who don’t have an axe to grind – the inside joke is that their “clients” can’t vote anymore). What I’m seeing is approximately 50/50 male/female victims of homicide as a result of domestic violence.
According to http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/intimate/addinfo.htm the data from the study you’re quoting comes from law enforcement agencies, which may or may not include Coroners and Medical Examiners (in some counties, the Sheriff is also the Coroner).
Perhaps I’m looking at data from anomalous areas of the country? Coroners and Medical Examiners are usually county agencies, occasionally state. Perhaps in some counties and states there are far more female victims? Or perhaps law enforcement agencies are not always reporting male homicide victims as domestic violence (my experience, as a male victim of DV and of false allegations of DV, is that men are presumed by law enforcement to be guilty until proven innocent in DV).
What are you thoughts?
p.s. As I mentioned in an earlier comment, this was a simple query. Accurate statistical reporting would require checking the circumstances of each one (which I couldn’t do because there were thousands of cases) but I spot checked a few and didn’t notice anything implying that the ratio was skewed by factors such as the male victim having a male partner, or the male victim being a child of a male perpetrator. There were some differences in circumstances (e.g. women were more likely to poison or smother their victim).
Bird:
I run the “risk” of appearing “feminist unfriendly” (as well as superfluous use of quotation marks) here, but hyperbole calls…
Male victims are, of whatever stripe, not looked upon well in society. Certainly not any long-term type of victimhood (like dealing with the psychological effects of traumatic events, and getting your feet back under you). This is evidenced in social custom (I don’t want to date you, hell, I’D have to support YOU) as well as legal principle (Violence Against Women Act…..nope, no sexism or blinders there). Men who are subordinate to women or otherwise perceived as “weak” (by BOTH men AND women) are usually tossed to the trash heap. I believe feminists call this PHMT.
So, the public will to help men is, shall we say, greatly diminished compared to the will to help women. Both women and men are guilty of this in equal measure. This is called misandry (which, by the way, shows up as a typo….now THERE’S some cultural awareness for you).
Coupled with the public’s general inclination to not believe in or care about male victims of DV (remember, we’re talking the general public here, not activists…and even some of THOSE don’t care), is the “What’s in it for me?” nature of politics. There’s no political capital in helping men, especially since no one cares about male victims of DV.
Which brings me to three, the main reason why people don’t care…
Because they haven’t been told it really exists. In fact, what they have been told is similar to this:
The public discourse on many gender issues has been dominated by feminist ideology for decades, often being taken as the default egalitarian position. Certainly this is the case in the media and academia, both excellent areas to influence public opinion, or even knowledge.
Through the use of such devices as Patriarchy Theory(tm), DV has been reframed from “Power and Control”, to “Patriarchal Construct”. Obviously, this was done for a reason. Oftentimes, redefining a term allows control of understanding of a concept. It’s sort of a basic precept of communications. Men have been subjected to being “defined” out of relevance, by feminist oriented Domestic Violence shelters and organizations, with the compliance of academic feminists (SOMEBODY has to do up the studies to justify the funds).
In short, feminist “scholarship” is lying to the general public to maintain the fiction that women are victims, both to preserve the levels of funding they currently enjoy, as well as to prevent erosion of public acceptance of Patriarchy Theory, the primary justification for a plethora of anti-male initiatives.
Men are up against all of these things, along with the usual public apathy and other concerns.
At least it’s nice to see a tacit admission that feminists don’t feel responsible for helping men, even though they can. Now if we can just get that damn Dictionary Definition changed……
Thanks Bird: “This is called misandry (which, by the way, shows up as a typo….now THERE’S some cultural awareness for you).”
LOL
Oops, that should have been thanks Factory…
Really? Feminists don’t do this? Because the feminist agency I work for serves male survivors, has men’s support groups, and supports men. I don’t see MRAs organizing these things. I see feminists doing the work to support both.
I believe this is what many MRAs demand–not that they have the same services as women, but that women should provide those services to them. Instead of organizing those things, they are demanding that already overworked and underpaid support workers add to their load. They demand that women’s shelters be opened to men, despite the very real risks that poses to the women who are there, rather than opening shelters for male survivors instead.
When I see men working as social workers, anti-violence activists, rape trauma counsellors, and other jobs to the same level that women do such work, then I will begin to believe that the real work of achieving gender equality has come. When I see equal numbers of men volunteering to work the crisis lines, crew the fundraisers, and give goodies to the bakesales, I will believe that MRAs are actually interested in solving the problem.
For the men who do this, good on you. But don’t blame general social inaction on the issue on feminists, because from where I’m standing, we’re the ones actually doing most of this work.
Bird,
I feel I have absolutely done the “grunt work.” having started an all volunteer national non profit that runs a 24/7 (I am sure you know what it takes to keep that up and running) helpline almost eight years ago and scrimping to make sure we can pay the phone bills, pay for hotel vouchers, food, clothing and transporation costs for some victims. But why does the person who wants to make changes for male victims have to be a man?
The funny thing is that two of the most prominent dv programs that specialize in offering men in relationships with abusive women supportive services are founded and directed by women, myself and Mary Cleary of http://www.amen.oi in Ireland.
For sure, battered women had a fight on their hands to prove the need for emergency shelter and services, however, battered men have even more hoops to jump through and myths to quash IMH and learned O. The battered women’s advocates have spent decades denying the existence of men abused by violent women so it is that much harder to prove they exist and there is a need for services for them.
It was difficult I am sure to make violence against women into a “social problem.” Battered men have different issues to deal with such as judges, police and dv advocates trained to believe that 95-97% of dv is men on women violence and that batterers (men only) will lie and manipulate to further abuse their female victims.
Women are allowed to cry, be fearful and use self defense, men are not. Most men have been told to believe that women are victims not men so the definition of “battered man” is far removed from their thought processes. There is a whole lot of “unlearning” to do in order to make sure that all victims receive the services they need and deserve. Jan
“I believe this is what many MRAs demand–not that they have the same services as women, but that women should provide those services to them.”
What an unusual belief. Do yo have any evidence for this, Bird?
“When I see men working as social workers, anti-violence activists, rape trauma counsellors, and other jobs to the same level that women do such work, then I will begin to believe that the real work of achieving gender equality has come.”
When I see women called upon to be the primary financial providers for their families, I believe that true gender equality will have come. And then you will see more men working as social workers.
Bird, that’s a thinly veiled assertion that DV shelters for men are Patriarchal and that women helping men somehow places them in a subservient position. I find that a bit odd. Is men helping women making them subservient to women? Should men stop helping women?
Not to get into the possible reasons for this attitude too much, wouldn’t you say it’s a bit odd to think of victims of DV as “Patriarchal Oppressors”? Isn’t it a bit cynical to assume all these men are lying?
Isn’t the hypocrisy in holding that viewpoint, while simultaneously supporting measures which force equal funding for “women’s initiatives” regardless of actual participation, just a bit jarring? Is The Patriarchy(tm) responsible for that too?
You assert that men don’t care enough, or that MRA’s don’t care enough, to go out and do the “grunt work”. We all do what we can. And we face a particularly well-funded ideology that is nothing if not hostile to the idea of men only shelters, and in most cases any support services at all (they’re happy to pass you on to someone else that won’t really help you though). And the callous disregard is not limited in scope to one person in the feminist movement.
So I think I’d hesitate a little more before you go making generalizations about MRA’s, and their uses in society.
I ask again….should men stop helping women?
Please stop reading what your agenda says I am saying and take a look at the words I’ve actually said.
I did not at any point in any of my posts use the word patriarchy. I believe men are victims of violence and deserve support. I did not say that women should not help men. I do believe that men need to step up and help men and women, and that currently, I don’t see that happening in equal numbers to the number of women who do anti-violence work. I see a whole lot of women supporting men and women both, and a lot of those women are feminists.
And many women are sole financial providers for their families–and they don’t have wives at home to do the housework or change the diapers. I have been a sole provider for a household (not with kids–I worked supporting a male partner who was a full-time student). Many other women are in two-income families and work as hard as their partners to pay the bills. If women don’t work outside the home or work limited hours, it is often so that they can devote time and effort to raising children and caring for the household. That work is unpaid labour, but it is work nonetheless and needs to be given significant value when considering the shared burden of caring for and supporting a family. The idea that women who don’t work are simply sitting around eating bonbons is a myth in 99% of cases. Looking after a family and house is a hell of a big job, and you just have to look at what it costs to have a full-time maid and nanny to realize what that’s worth in dollars.
I’d like you to stop assuming that because I’m a feminist I must hate men. I don’t. I have a father and two brothers who are hugely important in my life, and I have an amazing partner who is a man I deeply love and respect. I believe that our current social models of hierarchy and dominance (of which patriarchy is a part along with racism, classicm, heterosexism, and much more) do them great harm. In my work as an educator, I specifically address how sexual violence against men is often unrecognized and unreported, and I talk about the myth that men never experience sexual assault. It’s a real eye-opener, particularly in high school classrooms.
Oh, and I live in Canada. Title IX doesn’t exist here so that whole issue is outside my sphere of reference. But if you look at the earlier posts, you’ll note that I at no point said that men’s services shouldn’t have funding. I specifically noted that if a men’s shelter did not get funding because it was a service for men, that would be grounds for a legal challenge.
However, contrary to what you may think, most funding for anti-violence organizations does not come directly from the government. It comes from fundraising and donations, umbrella charities like United Way, and arms-length granting bodies. It’s an ongoing juggling act to find the money to keep things going, and the waiting list for services tends to be very long because agencies can’t afford to have enough staff to keep up with the demands. There needs to be more financial support for anti-violence work, period. If you can figure out how to get governments to come though with the cash, I’d love to hear how.
I do have to say that I admire what Jan is doing in providing supports for men who are facing DV. I think that’s important work, and I’m glad people are taking the initiative to do that. I would like to note, though, that the people commenting in this thread who are actively doing work to support men are women.
I find the words above from both you (Jan) and you (Bird) important in understanding the issues important for us Men and you (Women). You both speak carefully and wisely in what you say.
I hear of a need for us as a society to take the issue of domestic violence much more seriously. We need to fund services better – whether publicly or privately.
Perhaps more importantly we need to make domestic violence really “unacceptable” – to the point that it might greatly diminish. Stalking deaths, court orders related to partner-abuse – and similar should both become unnecessary nearly all the time.
I try to imagine such issues being viewed as we view the need for special education for severely disabled children – autism, cerebral palsy, etc. – not as merely an “individual problem” – but a societal problem that we all have a responsibility for.
Yes, services for men need to be taken more seriously. Services for men need to be encouraged, but not at the expense of services for women.
We need to look at How – we as a society – bring up individuals – who become abusive to others. It would seem likely to me that Early Childhood Education is one place to look at as well as what we do (and don’t do) in our schools.
We Men – also need to take More responsibility for working on these issues. Most of the good work that has been done has been done by Women.
It is unfortunate that the work of men like Steven Botkin (http://www.mensresourcesinternational.org/ and earlier on: http://www.mrcforchange.org/ ) and Paul Kivel: http://www.paulkivel.com/) is so notable because we have so few Male Visionaries.
This does not indicate that individual men are not “doing the right thing” – because some do good work. Similarly individual Women cause harm through their actions – in various areas.
It is, however, inappropriate to Blame Women and view Men as “the oppressed ones”.
Blame in general – is often not helpful. Working seriously to solve the problems is helpful. Helping expose the truths is helpful. Respecting others is helpful.
Thanks again Jan and Bird! Your words are helpful – as are your actions!
Very nice post, Bird.
Antigone,
Thank you. It was a very painful (physically and emotionally) phase in my life, and I stuck it out for far longer than I should have done. I became detached from my family (not their fault), lost some good friends and very nearly had to start completely from scratch.
The only positives I take from it is that I probably wouldn’t have met my wife in other circumstances (it’s our 6th wedding anniversary in a couple of weeks), and it’s made me appreciate her qualities even more than I might otherwise have done.
Well Bird, I live in Canada too, and I KNOW that a good portion of DV services, along with a LOT of other services, are paid for out of the government pocket. Perhaps that’s because I live in SK, the land of Socialist intervention.
Your reasoning is unsound. If there has to be an “equal” number of men and women doing a task before they can benefit from the services (or for that matter anything even approaching parity), then you as a woman wouldn’t be able to throw out garbage, flush the toilet, live in a house, drive on a road, walk on a street, or enter most buildings…as a starter.
If there are tax dollars used for something, then it SHOULD be mandatory that all sides get funding, not just one or two. Utilizing an abstraction of labour to achieve a goal is STILL using that person’s labour (ie, making money and donating/paying tax = work for the charity).
Also, expecting a group of people still struggling to have the issues recognized cannot POSSIBLY do all the things feminists seem to be saying we HAVE to do in order to be legit, or deserving of consideration.
But I’ll tell you what. If you can show me that there is a lower proportion of tax dollars used in DV services than men that are victims, I’ll concede.
Fair?
Might want to include “awareness campaigns” in there too. Don’t see many (any?) with men as victim…..
Just in case people haven’t noticed, I quit monitoring (and moderating it) 24 comments ago. Talk at your own risk.
OK then, specifics…
Serves male survivors of DV? What services does your agency provide? Also, are you sure that everyone there self-identifies as a feminist?
MRA’s are busy fighting lawsuits to obtain parental rights, equal reproductive rights, even application of the law, and many other things. There are some involved in the DV industry as well, by the way. For example, http://www.mediaradar.org, although many there would likely object to being called MRA’s as well. Like I keep saying, resources are thin.
Thank God for the internet.
…
Patently untrue. What MRA’s are saying is that any shelter receiving taxpayer funding should be compelled to provide equal services to men. Not necessarily equal numbers of “beds” per se, but equal services. In other words, if you have hospice for women, you must have hospice for men. If you can’t afford to do it, then give up the VAWA money and go on the donations alone. Someone else could use the funds I’m sure.
…
So we haven’t “earned” help?
What you fail to compensate for here is gender bias against men. I know it’s a tough concept, but Social Work has become overwhelmingly female (and feminist) over the years. As for volunteering in a rape crisis centre, or DV shelter….how receptive do YOU think these places are to men working there? How about men that don’t share the feminist ideology?
We live in an age where men are dropping out of the teaching profession, and are afraid to go near kids, because of the demonization of men that has taken place over the last 40 odd years. Now men get called perverts for taking pictures of their kids in a park (http://tinyurl.com/65qguv), and are afraid to help small children for fear of being mistaken for a child molester and getting thrown in jail (http://tinyurl.com/openm)…how much male involvement is likely in such places as rape crisis centres and DV shelters, especially when one doesn’t subscribe to the idea that all men are potential rapists, and believes that DV is a two way street both on the victim side AND on the perpetrator side.
…
Actually, I already did this by proxy, referring to the Law student’s paper that analyzes this very idea. There’s a quote above but I can summarize again if you like…
That article can be found at http://www.law.fsu.edu/journals/lawreview/downloads/304/kelly.pdf
Continuing….
Again, I point you to the current dominance of these areas as possible reason for this disparity.
With your contention that many of these women are indeed struggling themselves, I have absolutely no reason to doubt it. In fact, I would think that was more likely to be true than the opposite (richer, bon bon eating housewives). It’s been my experience that those closest to hardship themselves are far more passionate in their desire to help their fellow man than those with tons o cash. It’s also very commendable, and deserves recognition.
Again, commendable goals, but the bias can be quite “subtle” here as well. To clarify, who is committing this “sexual violence” to men and boys? In what context are men and women put in your presentations. This is not to minimize the importance or value of your work, merely to point out possible misunderstanding.
For example, a proud member of the KKK could characterize his/her organization as community-focused race relations, with advocacy for a certain ethnic group. That person could say he/she works tirelessly to correct the injustices of the world. And is working to establish “support” structures for victims of rape. That person is also proud of the model this center will use….all black men are potential rapists (which can be statistically argued with as much honesty as all men are potential rapists).
As for the not hating men thing, I never assume that actually. I look at what people write. You may have individual men you love, even feel sorry for when the injustices grind him down…but Men, as a group, I doubt very much come anywhere near as highly in your regard as women as a group.
But that is beyond the scope of this thread.
The sources of funding might not come directly from government, but they DO come from there nonetheless. Additionally, government funded “awareness campaigns” do not show the truth, government funded research is limited in scope (via PC internal censorship according to many profs). Matching funds, media dollars, schoolhouse education, official services…none of these exist for men, all exist for women.
100% – 0% doesn’t match Anyone’s numbers on male / female DV victims. Not even Statistics Canada’s.
And the fact that these have been characterized as “Women’s Issues” (by feminists) for 4 decades or so, coupled with the anti-male atmosphere (definitely anti-masculine) oftentimes part and parcel to the activity has nothing at all to do with it?
You can’t call something a feminist issue, ostracize and drum out those who differ in viewpoint, cast men as evil abusers ONLY throughout 90% of the history of the “industry”, remain virulently opposed to admitting female perpetrators exist in significant numbers, and then point to the lack of “average Joe” participation as evidence of lack of interest. To go back to the KKK example, that’s like blaming black people for not joining the Aryan Nation to try and “change it from within”.
To then use this lack of “interest” in men(MRA’s) as justification for said imbalance (especially given the amount of tax dollars going into every aspect of this problem) is disheartening.
“We find the gender-based classifications in the challenged statutes that provide programs for victims of domestic violence violate equal protection. We find male victims of domestic violence are similarly situated to female victims for purposes of the statutory programs and no compelling state interest justifies the gender classification. We reform the affected statutes by invalidating the exemption of males and extending the statutory benefits to men, whom the Legislature improperly excluded.”
The first steps men are taking are to change the law.
$35 million in taxpayer dollars to shelters in California.
100 shelters for women.
1 shelter for male victims.
The $21 million granted through DHS, which helped fund 94 shelter agencies last year, specifically goes to female victims under the Battered Women Protection Act of 1994, said Michelle Mussuto, an agency spokeswoman.
The state law that governs the DHS grant program defines domestic violence as “the infliction or threat of physical harm against past or present adult or adolescent female intimate partners and shall include physical, sexual and psychological abuse against the woman.”
Clear bias against male victims.
From: http://www.cafcusa.org/docs/cctimes_domestic_abuse.pdf
Dear Geo,
You are welcome! I agree that blame is not productive or helpful…and as soon as we all accept that in today’s society a victim is a victim is a victim whether male, female, gay, straight, transgender or bi-sexual progress will be made in this area.
I don’t profess to have the answers…however, after twelve years of being an advocate I feel that even if “battered women’s advocates” i.e. those who still feel that patriarchy and oppression of women is the root cause of dv, opened up their doors to male victims I don’t know that this would be the ideal answer given the fact that men have been mistrusted and excluded from these victim’s services for decades. I am not sure what the answer is but I am willing to explore and collaborate to find out. Jan
“Yes, services for men need to be taken more seriously. Services for men need to be encouraged, but not at the expense of services for women.”
Geo, I agree. And services for women need to be encouraged, but no longer at the expense of services for men. Unfortunately, neglect of services for men has been the situation to date in California.
The only instance I can think of where “well meaning others” may have strongly influenced the gaining of rights by an “oppressed group” (and this too could be questioned) relates to the ending of Slavery through the Civil War.
Blacks did not overcome the oppressions of the post-Civil War era – from well meaning Whites. Women did not gain the Vote and later on the successes of the 1960′s and beyond – from Men “benevolently” giving them rights.
It may be “unfair” that men don’t get “equal rights” – to support services – in such areas. It won’t change until Men Who Are Hurt – organize in small groups and then into a larger movement.
Until such a time it won’t be clear that Men will use services in significant numbers (might be a chicken and egg situation) but more importantly their cause won’t be taken seriously and acted upon.
MRA’s aren’t “the oppressed” in this situation and well meaning Women who have services for men as well as women aren’t likely to succeed without Men – taking the lead – from within the “oppressed class”.
It is unfortunate that several issues get in the way of men organizing – for their needs.
Personally – I’m more concerned with:
1.) Us men – working together – to redefine – “masculinity” – and live a different style of lives which might allow us to live longer, more satisfying lives – rather than – being violent towards each other, women and children – as well as we men not taking care of our bodies and our lives and
2.) Supporting – Women and Children – ending Violence, neglect etc. – related to – Male Violence, Racism, Classism, Homophobia etc.
and simply – growing and enjoying the years I have left in my life – in positive, affirming ways.
Thanks!
The main difference between people like you, Geo, and people like me, is where we see the problems emanating from. Again, a matter of perspective.
If you have never had your wife threaten you with a knife, or mock you mercilessly in front of business associates, or for that matter shoot you, indeed it might be difficult to view her violence as anything other than a response to Patriarchal Influence(tm).
Those of us that have been on the receiving end of this behaviour know different. If you have never experienced this behaviour, or if your immediate gut reaction is to minimize the effect having a gun shoved in my mouth might have, then I would suggest you have no idea what you’re talking about.
You, on the other hand, might point to studies done by special interest groups of feminist leanings, funded by VAWA, that say people like me either exist in tiny numbers, or that the “social ramifications” of said abuse is negligible, or both.
There have been millions of dollars poured into research in this field, and yet no one has a clear picture of the extent of the abuse? My ass! There’s over 200 independent studies conducted worldwide that clearly show male victims are nearly as prevalent as female in most categories of violence, and more in some others, and further that perpetrators of all levels of violence are equally men and women.
This says nothing about women other than that they’re human.
California has been forced to provide equivalent services to men (hopefully it sticks), so I guess this whole argument is moot once the “real live data” comes in.
Okay so battered women’s advocates had the idea first, great! Does that mean that all tax payer funded services for domestic violence victims/survivors in this country, including but not limited to free “safe” shelter, legal representation, advocacy, counseling, transitional housing, food, clothing, free automobiles etc should only be used for women 99% of the time? I have a problem with our tax money going to one gender 99% of the time especially given the fact that what battered women’s advocates believed to be the cause of domestic violence from the 1950′s on is at present only a small portion of why abuse happens (read some of Dr. Dutton’s and others research for up to date information on that subject).
I have listened to tens of thousands of men in relationships with abusive women over the last eight years as an advocate on our helpline so I don’t need to have a contest as to who should help who and whether or not men are abused by women in significant numbers…that’s all smoke and mirrors to me. Bottom line, if we truly want to END STOP BANISH family violence we should work together and stop this nonsense.