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.

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.

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!

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.

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

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

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.

“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.”

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.

…

“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.”

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.

…

“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.”

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.

…

“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. “

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…

“This fundamental feminist understanding of domestic
violence has far-reaching implications. By dismissing the possibility
of female violence, the framework of legal programs and social norms
is narrowly shaped to respond only to the male abuse of women. Female
batterers cannot be recognized. Male victims cannot be treated.
If we are to truly address the phenomenon of domestic violence, the
legal response to domestic violence and the biases which underlie it
must be challenged.”

That article can be found at http://www.law.fsu.edu/journals/lawreview/downloads/304/kelly.pdf

Continuing….

“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.”

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.

“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.”

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.

“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.”

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.

“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. “

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.