Sexism you have personally experienced or have heard of? READ POST 1

py2006 · 21-01-2016 11:13am

Panthro wrote: »

http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/here-are-the-10-new-actions-in-the-govts-new-strategy-to-deal-with-domestic-and-sexual-violence-716659.html

1 in 5 women but strangely enough zero stats for men.

In fairness it is difficult to come up with an accurate stat when men won't/can't speak up for fear of humiliation and loosing kids.

In reality I'd say it would be a similar stat.

gizmo555 · 21-01-2016 11:24am

py2006 wrote: »

In fairness it is difficult to come up with an accurate stat when men won't/can't speak up for fear of humiliation and loosing kids.

In reality I'd say it would be a similar stat.

When you consider how broadly Women's Aid defines "domestic violence", i.e., "physical abuse, emotional abuse, sexual abuse or financial abuse", I think it's near certain to be as high, if not higher. This broad definition suits Women's Aid, as it is the basis of their claim that one in five women will suffer domestic violence in their lifetime.

Women's Aid also state that "In the majority of cases it is perpetrated by men and experienced by women." How do they know this? As far as I know, they don't collect any statistics on domestic violence perpetrated by women against men.

Wibbs · 21-01-2016 11:35am

maybe

When studies have been done in places like the US, UK and Australia, it's been shown that it's pretty much 50/50 when it comes to physical abuse. Indeed in non reciprocal physical abuse women are well ahead of men in the stats. Women are more likely to be the one way sole abusers and are more likely to strike first. If according to the script women were the tiny minority of abusers then one would expect gay women would have among the lowest abuse rates, instead they have one of the highest(when that stat is brought up it's usually still blamed on the "patriarchy", because reality doesn't fit the fantasy and men are always to blame etc.).

That's physical abuse. If we bring in emotional abuse I'd bet the farm that just as there is a large bias towards men as a gender regarding sexual abusers there would be an equally large bias against women as a gender regarding emotional abusers.

gizmo555 · 21-01-2016 11:47am

There was an Irish report published in 2001 by the Marriage and Relationship Counselling Service (now renamed Relationships Ireland), which stated that:

In those who come for counselling to the MRCS, about half are in relationships in which domestic violence occurs. One-third of the violence is perpetrated by partners on each other; 41 per cent is perpetrated by women on men. A quarter (26 per cent) is perpetrated by men on women. "Women are more likely than men to be the perpetrators of domestic violence" among MRCS clients . . .

http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/finding-that-women-can-be-the-violent-partner-will-startle-1.314729

Sleepy · 21-01-2016 1:04pm

While that stat would indeed support the idea that female on male domestic abuse isn't as rare as many feminists would have you believe I think one would have to question the subset used in the formation of those statistics: couples attending marriage counselling.

I might be wrong, but my gut tells me that women are possibly more likely than men to just end a physically abusive relationship than to attend marriage counselling.

There's a variety of supporting factors for this reasoning though:

more support for abused women than men
less societal shame in admitting to being the victim of domestic abuse for women
more favourable family court outcomes
women being more likely to end a relationship than men in the main etc.

gizmo555 · 21-01-2016 1:29pm

One would have to question the subset based on what your gut tells you? If you say so.

Personally, I would suggest that the figures are if anything likely to be more accurate than others about who was perpetrating abuse. This is because the couples involved were attending counselling together, with a view to achieving reconciliation. One would expect that people would be more likely to be truthful in this setting, because their partners who know the truth too are sitting right beside them.

On the other hand, where relationships break down, the Irish legal system hugely incentivises women to exaggerate or invent abuse.

Sleepy · 21-01-2016 1:59pm

It's a valid point about over-reporting of abuse in women due to the Irish legal system but do you think that as many women would forgive physical abuse as men?

A woman almost always has less to lose than a man in a relationship breakdown and it's widely accepted that even where no abuse exists, women are far more likely to be the one instigating the separation.

So, while the stat may be true of the group attending. I suggest that the subset of couples that attend aren't representative of the overall group: women have less incentive to try to save the marriage: particularly where abuse is involved.

DEFTLEFTHAND · 22-01-2016 12:53am

In regards to male victims of domestic violence I don't think there's enough support out there for them, who do they turn to in such a situation? I believe certain men's groups state that it's very difficult to receive government funding for things like Men's Shelters. Take this sad story from Canada for eg.
http://womenspost.ca/owner-of-shelter-for-abused-men-and-children-commits-suicide-after-financial-ruin-ridicule/

Confidentially is paramount to certain male victims of domestic abuse. Unfortunately many men are too embarrassed and ashamed to admit to their friends or family that their wife is abusing them. They really shouldn't be.

The Black Oil · 22-01-2016 6:53pm

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

So, BBC's The Big Questions had a debate about social media and misgyny yesterday with Milo Yiannopoulos, Connie St. Louis and Kate Smurthwaite as guest commentators.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sYh7uq-hzhY

I'll preface this by stating that I am no fan of Yiannopoulos at all. He's slimy, noxious and happy to keep silent about sexism and abuse when it suits him. However, at least he cites studies to back up his points. He waits his turn patiently and is then shouted down by the 2 feminists who call for him to be removed. Odd how they use tactics they chide men for purportedly using to keep women silent. Finally, a man in the audience speaks up saying that Milo doesn't represent all men only to be told that it's "just words".

Haven't watched all of that clip yet. Don't catch that show very often - it's normally concerned with moral questions and such, yeah? But honestly, based on a few moments those people are nearly as bad as the internet/social media they're giving out about. Not familiar with Yiannopouloschap at all. A quick Google suggests a grain of salt. And Smurthwaite doesn't seem much better. There's a clip (link) of her on that show discussing faith/heaven. Now, I don't believe in God, but I don't see the need to go on a TV show and basically be a dick to others. That just seems to be the case with some, male or female, regardless of ideology. Who shouts the loudest.

The Black Oil · 24-01-2016 3:42pm

deaddonkey15 wrote: »

She left a tweet implying that she won't go and see The Revenant as it has a predominantly male cast.

That's fairly standard for her take on films. Based on past tweets it seems almost impossible for her to assess a film unless it confirms to her particular brand of feminist expectations. She knows how to get her Twitter fan base going. Either that, or she's plain trolling.

Regarding her media gender audit, she complained at the #fempower event that there are no women CEOs/editors in Irish newspapers/radio, etc. Someone from TheJournal.ie corrected her that its editor, deputy editor and some other senior reporter were women...Presumably this came about because they are competent and not that some quota was forced on a private enterprise.

https://twitter.com/EmCally/status/688362564829458432

One other thing from #fempower, a speaker from a group of sex workers alliance was invited, then apparently not. I have not read enough about this issue to have a view on it, however, this sort of gesture seems be the censorship/safe space thing that's been previously discussed in this thread. The tweets are a little confusing.

https://twitter.com/LauraAgustin/status/688385826275856384

Panthro wrote: »

http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/here-are-the-10-new-actions-in-the-govts-new-strategy-to-deal-with-domestic-and-sexual-violence-716659.html

1 in 5 women but strangely enough zero stats for men.

According to Amen's 2014 annual report

In 2014, slightly over six and a half thousand (6,660) contacts were received by AMEN. We use the word ‘contacts’ to describe the level of activity within the organisation. For the purpose of this Annual Report the word contacts represents the total number of interactions with the service,including phone calls, texts, emails, posts, counselling, court accompaniment, group meetings and one to one support sessions. These 6,660 contacts represents a 36.8% increase in overall activity within the service from the previous year.

~

One to One Support Sessions

A total of 477 one to one Support Sessions were delivered to 359 men in 2014.

Many men contacting AMEN attended more than one session. This is an increase of 47% from 2013 and an increase of 82% from 2012. The support sessions took place both in the AMEN office in Navan and the outreach clinic in Dublin.

orubiru · 25-01-2016 1:42pm

The Black Oil wrote: »

Haven't watched all of that clip yet. Don't catch that show very often - it's normally concerned with moral questions and such, yeah? But honestly, based on a few moments those people are nearly as bad as the internet/social media they're giving out about. Not familiar with Yiannopouloschap at all. A quick Google suggests a grain of salt. And Smurthwaite doesn't seem much better. There's a clip (link) of her on that show discussing faith/heaven. Now, I don't believe in God, but I don't see the need to go on a TV show and basically be a dick to others. That just seems to be the case with some, male or female, regardless of ideology. Who shouts the loudest.

I think it's fairly obvious that a significant part of Milo's career is deliberately trying to stir people up. He is going out there and challenging a lot of commonly held beliefs. Many of the people he challenges react so badly to the challenge, and fail so miserably to defend their own beliefs, that they lose all credibility.

I mean, Connie St Louis is a highly qualified, award winning, Senior Lecturer in Journalism. You would expect her to be sensible, eloquent and knowledgeable and yet she comes off terribly here.

His opponents here have so little self awareness that they don't see how they are playing into his hands.

The title of the show, and the main question, is "does social media reveal men's hatred of women". Now, for me, this is a pretty absurd notion and the answer is an obvious "no" with probably a further discussion into the prevalence of trolling and maybe some thoughts on how to deal with trolls and bullies online.

We could be discussing a problem with a potential solution. I think that trying to somehow objectively prove that "men hate women" is impossible and obviously quite an antagonistic thing to do.

I don't hate women, do you? End of conversation, really.

No, instead of this the first woman basically just straight up says that, yes, men hate women. She gives an anecdote and this is a perfectly agreeable, applause worthy, statement from her.

Milo just counters with an equally outrageous statement. He says "the research shows that it isn't that men hate women, it's that women hate everyone" and everyone loses their damn minds.

"Men hate women" - This seems perfectly agreeable, lets discuss.

"Women hate everyone" - HOW DARE YOU! SHUT HIM UP!

The thing here is that Milo is countering their obviously outrageous claim with an obviously outrageous statement of his own. Rather than both sides just saying "OK, maybe we are BOTH being ridiculous lets dial it down a bit" you have one side essentially asking to be allowed to say absurd things without any challenge.

The end result is that the guy who is deliberately trying to wind people up looks like the most reasonable, unbiased, and level headed person in the room. I don't understand how they cannot see this?

The two "feminists" even try to shout down the lady with the glasses and the reasonable, level-headed, approach!

They state outright that "men hate women", and believe in that worldview so completely that they'll actually shout over anyone who tries to contradict it. So, they allow their opponent to basically say anything at all and then sit back and laugh at them as they play the hysterical, shrill, irrational feminist stereotype to perfection.

orubiru · 25-01-2016 1:59pm

fits wrote: »

OK I am going to post one post on this topic and am not getting drawn into a discussion on it. but here goes.

She has a point.

Time and time again female/feminist posters are asked in here why they do not do more to distance themselves from the extreme feminist organisations, a group who make up a tiny tiny proportion of the worlds population. But the same is never asked of men to distance themselves from this behaviour which transcends class, race, etc. It is a global epidemic. It really is. And I have rarely seen any meaningful self examination from men as to why this behaviour is so widespread. And it is.

I walked into flannerys bar about ten years ago and was molested four times in two minutes as I was walking through. By different men. I could not see who the perpetrators were because it was so packed. I was powerless to react. There was an opportunity there and they took it. I walked out and never set foot in that bar or any similar bar since. It disgusts me.

So, why do a lot of men behave like this? WHY? And why do you turn a blind eye to your sleazy friend who does this. At least tell them to cop the fcuk on if you are not at this behaviour yourself. Its not harmless and its not funny. And it does lead to more serious stuff too.

Its in bars its online, its everywhere. And only men can stop it.

"OK I am going to post one post on this topic and am not getting drawn into a discussion on it. but here goes."

What is this? Have I opened the Paranormal forum by mistake?

How can someone seriously believe that is just fine to tar an entire group of people with the same brush and walk away saying "and won't even discuss it"?

I tell ya what, men can go out and try to stop all the bad things that men do and women can go out and try to stop all the bad things that women do. We can all meet back here in, what, 1,000 maybe 2,000 years?

Society has been participating in meaningful self examination of why bad people do bad things for many thousands of years.

Why did some guys grab you in a bar? I don't know. Why do some mothers abuse their children?

Have you ever considered that a lot of the men who go on to do the "more serious stuff" that you are talking about were abused by their mothers as children?

Are you willing to go to Mumsnet.com and tell the mothers there to stop abusing their sons? After all, it is one of the causative factors in boys becoming abusers in adulthood.

Will you let us know how they respond to "its in bars its online, its everywhere, and only Mothers can stop it"?

newport2 · 25-01-2016 4:53pm

orubiru wrote: »

The title of the show, and the main question, is "does social media reveal men's hatred of women". Now, for me, this is a pretty absurd notion and the answer is an obvious "no" with probably a further discussion into the prevalence of trolling and maybe some thoughts on how to deal with trolls and bullies online.

The worst part of that is for that title to hold, it has to be taken as a given that men hate women. Even if it was along the lines of "Does social media show that men hate women?" it could be discussed somewhat. But no, we all know men hate women already, now does social media reveal this?

mzungu · 25-01-2016 7:01pm

newport2 wrote: »

The worst part of that is for that title to hold, it has to be taken as a given that men hate women. Even if it was along the lines of "Does social media show that men hate women?" it could be discussed somewhat. But no, we all know men hate women already, now does social media reveal this?

Exactly, the unfortunate thing is both Connie St. Louis and Kate Smurthwaite have this engrained into their mindset. Neither of them are that great at debating their points either, their strategy seemed to involve talking over those who disagreed with them, and then calling for that Milo chap to be put in jail.

This post summed it up.

They state outright that "men hate women", and believe in that worldview so completely that they'll actually shout over anyone who tries to contradict it. So, they allow their opponent to basically say anything at all and then sit back and laugh at them as they play the hysterical, shrill, irrational feminist stereotype to perfection.

Just from watching that video, it is easy to see now how somebody like Connie St. Louis took Tim Hunts remarks as offence. She actively goes out of her way to be the victim.

eviltwin · 25-01-2016 7:57pm

Fits that is a disgusting thing that happened to you but unless the men you know are telling you it's no big deal then what do you expect them to do about it?

I've been raped by a man, I've had a man punch me in the face on a night out, been felt up, was randomly punched in the head by a man....what has that got to do with men as a whole? Every man I've told has been angry, disgusted and sympathetic towards me. That's all they can do. They are as powerless to do anything as we are. A scumbag is no more likely to listen to some man just because he's male. Plenty of men are abused by men too.

I've been hurt by men but they've also been my biggest allies. I'm married to a man, I have a son,my best friend is a man. Don't hold them all to account for the actions of a view.

Re the rants against feminism I think most of the posters here are talking about the extreme examples and not rational ones like us.

Sleepy · 26-01-2016 3:28pm

eviltwin, I don't think you can claim to be a rational feminist without accepting that the movement has no interest in gender equality: it's a broad group whose only common denominator is that they lobby for women's interests whether they conflict with those of men or not.

A rational person who wants gender equality is an egalitarian.

Obviously the same holds true of Meninists / MRAs: the only way they can claim to be rational by admitting that they have no interest in women's rights, only those of men. They might argue that the movement is a rational response to feminism and claim to be a "balancing counter-lobby" but I firmly believe the interests of both genders are best tackled from an egalitarian point-of-view. A gender-blind legal system is the cornerstone of an egalitarian society imo.

Zulu · 26-01-2016 6:18pm

No

Sleepy wrote: »

...but I firmly believe the interests of both genders are best tackled from an egalitarian point-of-view. A gender-blind legal system is the cornerstone of an egalitarian society imo.

I really can't understand how this concept isn't more broadly accepted. It seems so painfully obvious to me that I question my own bias of it.

ancapailldorcha · 27-01-2016 12:56am

maybe

I've met a few feminists in real life and the impression I get from them is that they're entirely unaware of men's issues like suicide, fathers' rights and so on... They seemed quite receptive when I brought them up for discussion. The problem with rags like The Guardian is that the lunatics ultimately sell.

Pawwed Rig · 27-01-2016 9:13am

Article here

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tees-35413153

Not once does it mention Mothers.

One eyed Jack · 27-01-2016 10:00am

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

Article here

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tees-35413153

Not once does it mention Mothers.

It doesn't mention fathers either?

I'm just wondering how is the article perceived to be sexist?

smash · 27-01-2016 10:06am

I went to the local Garda station last night to get a passport form stamped and while waiting I noticed all the little pamphlets in the shelf on the wall. I was a bit taken a back by the multitudes of leaflets and booklets about help and support for abused women and children's support networks where sitting lonely to the right hand side stood only one leaflet about support for male victims of domestic violence.

Is it just still a case that it's just not reported enough to justify more support networks?

mrkiscool2 · 27-01-2016 10:30am

smash wrote: »

I went to the local Garda station last night to get a passport form stamped and while waiting I noticed all the little pamphlets in the shelf on the wall. I was a bit taken a back by the multitudes of leaflets and booklets about help and support for abused women and children's support networks where sitting lonely to the right hand side stood only one leaflet about support for male victims of domestic violence.

Is it just still a case that it's just not reported enough to justify more support networks?

Probably because their is only one organisation for men (AMEN, criminally under-funded and still doing a fantastic job).

Pawwed Rig · 27-01-2016 11:52am

One eyed Jack wrote: »

It doesn't mention fathers either?

I'm just wondering how is the article perceived to be sexist?

IME I have never seen a man walking around town in his PJs so why be so gender neutral in the article?
Where men are the culprits there is no such reluctance to be gender specific.

One eyed Jack · 27-01-2016 12:25pm

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

IME I have never seen a man walking around town in his PJs so why be so gender neutral in the article?
Where men are the culprits there is no such reluctance to be gender specific.

Ahh here, so by not being sexist, the article is sexist?

They were being gender neutral because they were avoiding being sexist. If there's another article where they are being sexist, then it'd be better to point out the sexism in that article, rather than assume that women must be the main culprits because the assumption is that it's mostly women who drop the children off at school.

Can you see how that assumption is sexist?

Carlos Orange · 27-01-2016 12:34pm

No

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Ahh here, so by not being sexist, the article is sexist?

Articles being gender specific when describing bad behaviour predominantly done by men and not when describing bad behaviour predominantly done by women is sexist.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

the assumption is that it's mostly women who drop the children off at school.
Can you see how that assumption is sexist?

The assumption is that because they only see women wearing pjs outside that only women do so.
It is an assumption but hardly a giant leap (depending on the sample size of outside pj wearing people observed).

One eyed Jack · 27-01-2016 1:47pm

psinno wrote: »

Articles being gender specific when describing bad behaviour predominantly done by men and not when describing bad behaviour predominantly done by women is sexist.

I have no problem admitting I'm inherently sexist and I have no interest in this 'gender equality' nonsense, from any side, but the article reported exactly what the Principal said, so it wasn't the article being sexist, and it wasn't the Principal being sexist, and because they weren't being sexist, they're still doing something wrong?

The assumption is that because they only see women wearing pjs outside that only women do so.
It is an assumption but hardly a giant leap (depending on the sample size of outside pj wearing people observed).

That would be Pawwed Rig being sexist then, not the article, and not the Principal of the school in question. I think if Pawwed Rig had been a bit clearer about what they were trying to point out was sexist, I wouldn't have had to go looking for something that wasn't there myself.

silverharp · 27-01-2016 1:56pm

I'm pretty sure that if a man walked around in jocks and a half opened dressing gown he would be arrested as a sex pest. I did a quick Google and there was an old thread on a mums site and basically every poster used the terms parents or people. I'd put it down to female in group preference. There seems to be a bias to not be critical of women if it happens to be their issue.
I'm sure there are men walking around these areas in mouldy old tracksuit bottoms , flip flops and a string vest that is a couple of days overdue for the wash but Its not an attempt to trun being utterly lazy into a fashion statement.

um7y1h83ge06nx · 27-01-2016 2:23pm

Nothing lazier than see some scumbag going around in PJs.

Anyone know why the do it? To me it seems to be an attention seeking thing and to let people know that they are having a great time chilling out and they have no work to go to.

Buy yes I have only seen women out and about in what could be termed bed clothes or sleepwear.

silverharp · 27-01-2016 2:31pm

Darren Incalculable AcrossL wrote: »

Nothing lazier than see some scumbag going around in PJs.

Anyone know why the do it? To me it seems to be an attention seeking thing and to let people know that they are having a great time chilling out and they have no work to go to.

Buy yes I have only seen women out and about in what could be termed bed clothes or sleepwear.

its the welfare equivalent of a "Harvey Nichols wife"

One eyed Jack · 27-01-2016 2:53pm

silverharp wrote: »

I'm pretty sure that if a man walked around in jocks and a half opened dressing gown he would be arrested as a sex pest.

No he wouldn't, not unless he was actually being, y'know, a sex pest. No more than a woman would be arrested for walking around in knickers and a half open dressing gown unless she was being a sex pest (she might be done for indecent exposure if she were just walking around in her knickers though, where a man wouldn't be!).

I did a quick Google and there was an old thread on a mums site and basically every poster used the terms parents or people. I'd put it down to female in group preference. There seems to be a bias to not be critical of women if it happens to be their issue.

You appear to have noticed from your research that women aren't sexist. That kinda flies in the face of the theme of this thread. I'm not being awkward here but the complaint that something isn't sexist, is just very odd, especially when there are many, many examples in everyday life of blatant sexism against men. I don't have to go googling for it either!

Sexism you have personally experienced or have heard of? *READ POST 1*

Comments

Sexism you have personally experienced or have heard of? READ POST 1