million women rise

See this is a perfect example of the racism/sexism ripple effect.

It seems to make everyone of that category, victim or not, a sense of entitlement and privilege. Next it'll be the gays demonizing straights.

 

I can see your point. I agree that it would be better to focus on all abuse, for both sexes. I just also think that it would be better to have a focus.

That being said, I can see how some would use this to feel 'entitlement' or further feminist ideals (I hate the term 'feminism' BTW, humanism is my term). Honestly, I feel that this march does more good than bad. Does that mean that it doesn't have faults? no. But I'd rather there be a march for women than no one at all.

I do agree with you, though: more so now than before.

 

I don't know enough about the march to say for certain one way or another. I think it's great to raise awareness to domestic abuse;
but the website has pictures of people marching with signs that specify about male violence;
and I really can't condone creating such divide between the sexes, and belittling males so much when the Western world already treats us as aggressors. (Though studies that show a shift in gender roles have been making the news a lot lately :2thumbsup

Thanks for telling me so =)

 

Just found this thread......been away for a couple of weeks. No point in getting involved in the arguments going on here. It's International Women's Day and we have a right to stand up for what we see as an issue that needs addressed! Violence against women across the world has reached epic proportions and just because we live in a relatively civilised society doesn't mean we don't have to stand up and be proud to be part of a demonstration that if nothing else will highlight the appalling situation that some women live with every day!

 

:2thumbsup:

 

No one should have to live in fear of violence, I totally agree with that. No man, no woman, no child. But I do not see how this march is so threatening to you. Why is it when the issues of sexual and physical aggression towards women comes up there is always someone (rarely a woman for whatever reason) squirming uncomfortably in their seat ready to somehow trivialize the victims, to distract from the issue with some type of off topic retort. And this isn't just when it comes to "predominately" women related issues, but racism, etc. I don't understand- is it discomfort? A feeling of being left out?

Domestic violence against men is most certainly a problem, especially in how that society doesn't really look upon it with the seriousness it deserves. Unfortunately, options and resources aren't as readily available to or are limited when it comes to the male victims. But this march wasn't about that. If you feel so strongly about the issue of domestic violence towards men, why don't you make a march for Men?

And I really don't mean to be harsh. I've been looking at posts in the feminism forum and it seems that narrow minded troll after troll keeps popping up, guys seemingly wanting to just f*ck with "femini-nazi's" rather than offering opinions and offering a sincere, open dialogue. And I thought it was supposed to be a "feel good" feminism forum, not just another arena for aggression towards feminists.

It would be one thing- to just offer you're two cents. A "hey, great idea for a march, it would be great to also have more focus on domestic violence against men", would have sufficed. And that would have been great, brought awareness and opened a conversation, rather than just dismissing/trivializing the problem with criticism.

But hey, that's just my two cents

 

You dismiss my opinion by pointing out that my opinion was dismissive.
It seems you miss the irony.

Anyone else's posts are completely irrelevant to our discussion; it would be appreciated if you judged me based on my posts, not the posts that you associate with it.

You have not really answered my question of why this march seems to focus on man-on-woman violence; or how this could be considered anything but sexist -- just suggested ways in which I could respond to this differently.

 

I'm not sure I could really answer that, as I'm not organizing the event.

I haven't looked at more recent statistics (though they are more of estimates at best) lately, but perhaps the number of male aggressors is higher than that of woman aggressors? Or perhaps the knowledge/awareness of men-woman domestic violence is more widespread than woman-woman domestic violence?
It may just be that the organizers wanted to focus on just one problem for the march, as I believe was stated.

Though I believe there should be marches to bring public awareness to violence against men from women, and more appropriate to have a march for just all victims of violence, period. Because that is the bigger picture isn't it, the violences against and within humanity itself? And we should be tackling the problem as just people without gender divisions. but I don't think the march meant to come across as having any ill intent, just support for the victims it is focusing on.

I agree with what you're saying man, just not necessarily the way you came across.

 

It's not sexist, statistics prove that women are FAR more often victim of violence and abuse than men. Domestic violence on men happens, but those cases are a minority. A lot more women than men end up at the hospital after a beating or a rape. Sorry, I respect your opinion but you gotta face this fact.

 

This is only if you go by what is reported to the police. Statistically men are far less likely to report domestic violence, particularly because of the social stigma of being 'abused' by a woman. In Scotland studies have shown the numbers to be about even. Truth be told, no one really knows how often it happens.

I also take issue with the nonsense that 'violence on women' is on the rise and is somehow epidemic. Violence against men has always been more prevalent throughout history, and no one seems to give a shit. Take VAWA in the United States, the Violence against women act, which essentially means if you are violent to a man, you get the usual sentence, but if so to a woman, you get extra time. What??

 

Again; you are ignoring that this specifies violence by men. That's the part that really gets me.

Is it not as bad if a lesbian's partner beats her?

 

Statistically lesbian partners tend to be the most abusive - in other words it is reported more often between two lesbians than male/female and male/male relationships (relatively speaking when one considers that male/female relationships are the norm and most common). But no, in this march lesbians would not have been relevant.

 

What can also happen is that BOTH partners are violent and abusive on each other. Sounds surprising but it's more common that we can think.

And I think the reason why lesbian abusive relationships are more often reported to the authorities is simply because women are encouraged to seek for help when bad things happen, while for men it's well seen to act strong and keep things for themselves.

Of course not! I forgot that detail you're right. If it was a walk against violence on women, no matter what gender the agressor is, it'd be more pertinent (and you guys wouldn't freak out so much about it).

 

First of all, here are some fun statistics from the US Department of Justice:

• Nearly 2 in 3 female victims of violence were related to or knew their attacker. (p. iii) *notice how "attacker" isn't gendered*
  
• Over two-thirds of violent victimizations against women were committed by someone known to them: 31% of female victims reported that the offender was a stranger. Approximately 28% were intimates such as husbands or boyfriends, 35% were acquaintances, and the remaining 5% were other relatives. (In contrast, victimizations by intimates and other relatives accounted for only 5% of all violent victimizations against men. Men were significantly more likely to have been victimized by acquaintances (50%) or strangers (44%) than by intimates or other relatives.) (p. 1)
• Almost 6 times as many women victimized by intimates (18%) as those victimized by strangers (3%) did not report their violent victimization to police because they feared reprisal from the offender. (p. 1)
• Annually, compared to males, females experienced over 10 times as many incidents of violence by an intimate. On average each year, women experienced 572,032 violent victimizations at the hands of an intimate, compared to 48,983 incidents committed against men. (p. 6)

"While women are less likely than men to be victims of violent crimes overall, women are 5 to 8 times more likely than men to be victimized by an intimate partner."

Read those last two statements again: 48,983 incidents of violence committed against men and men are more likely to be victims of violent crime. Apparently, men are not overlooked at all when it comes to abuse and violence. Nearly 50,000 a year, on average, are abused. Still less than the amount of women and it's highly probable that this number is inaccurate. Men are less likely to report abuse than women. Um, that's a problem, isn't it? Close to 50,000 men is a lot of abused men and over 500,000 women is a lot of abused women. No matter how you try and twist that around, still more abused women than men, even if you account for the men who don't report being victimized. So, I can kind of understand why there would be marches like this for just women.

Second of all, for all you men coming on here, whining about how "sexist" this Million Woman March is, while the march itself is for women only, there are rallies that were "mixed"--meaning they included men. Guess you missed that? Third, if you have a problem with this, why don't you contact this organization and tell them? I bet money if enough men showed interest in participating in this march (after all, the children includes male children) they'd probably be happy to drop the "women only" thing. But...none of you have and none of you will, will you? No, it's so much easier to come on here and whine about it, isn't it?

Let's pretend for a minute that they did do away with making their marches women only, would any of you men participate in anything like this? I'm guessing you probably wouldn't. Once again, it's so much easier to whine, bitch, and accuse on the Internet rather than take real-world action. I emailed them a month ago and asked them to at least form a march for single fathers and their children or same-sex male partners if they weren't going to lift their "women only" policy. No one has emailed me back yet. Have any of the men on here complaining done anything like that? What about the women who dislike their policy? Here's their contact info: (Sorry about the color, but for some reason, I can't make it darker).

Million Women Rise,
c/o WRC,
Ground Floor East,
33-41 Dallington St. East,
London
EC1V 0BB
Email: info@millionwomenrise.com
Info line: 07727 419634


Also, to address all the complaints that men don't get enough attention when it comes to violence, OMG--Hold the fucking phone! What's this???

http://www.batteredmen.com/
http://www.dvmen.org/
http://www.batteredhusbandssupport.com/
http://menstuff.org/issues/byissue/batteredmen.html#secretside
http://menstuff.org/issues/byissue/domesticviolence.html
http://www.maledepression.com/

Gee, it sure looks like violence against men IS being addressed and being taken seriously. There's a sticky on this forum called "Links and Resources for Men" from feminist.com (OMG!! Those man-hating feminists! No way!) there's a link for battered and abused men--BY WOMEN!! I'm betting some of the men reading this have been the victims of violence at some point in your life. Whether it was the school yard bully, your mom/dad or another relative, or a girlfriend/wife/domestic partner. There is help for you and it is being taken seriously. If you still think there isn't enough awareness for abused men, why don't you get out there and do something about it? I'm sure the majority of you reading this won't do it, either because you don't care or it's just too hard.

 

Once again, I must ask; do any of these statistics make violence against men less important?

That's a completely irrelevant. The argument is about this march.

Why so?
Because that makes your argument easier?

I e-mailed them calling them sexist man-hating cunts (In slightly nicer words)


Once again, any other marches are completely irrelevant to how fucked up this specific march is.

 

Nice to see you, Duck. I certainly expected my words to rile you up and get a reply. It's always fun, isn't it?

Those statistics don't lessen the importance of men as victims at all--that was the point. The point was to show how violence against men isn't ignored, just like all those links show it isn't ignored. I think I proved the importance of it, so what's the problem? There's even a link on the site I got those statistics from just for male victims and gay and lesbian victims. Clearly, all victims of violence, despite their genders or sexual orientations, are being taken seriously. Once again, what's your problem with that? Or are you just upset because I proved violence against women isn't taken MORE seriously at the expense of everyone else, which is what you probably would rather believe.

When did I mention another organization? Read over it again, buddy. I was specifically addressing the Million Women Rise. You probably didn't think to email them until I said something, did you? I was addressing THIS march and only this march. Read more carefully next time.

You didn't even try to acknowledge whether or not you would participate in THIS march if men were allowed. It would make my argument easier if you addressed that. You either have no interest or you do. So, which is it?

Good for you for emailing them, but name-calling isn't going to help.

 

I might be slightly annoyed because violence on women is a more hot issue; but I am pissed off that this march is all about violence by men and has very sexist overtones, that most choose to ignore and/or accept

You apparently didn't read what you wrote:

I told them their march was sexist, I didn't actually call them cunts. As I said in the post, I used slightly nicer wording.

I wouldn't participate in any march that focused on violence from any particular group. I would possibly participate in a march or protest against violence, if there was a specific issue at hand, and I felt it would have any effect.

Most of my activism is done by boycotting, writing, petitioning (mostly signing onto them), and writing to my elected officials. Protests can be a good news story, but they only seem effective when they are about something very direct and specific; and even then, they are rarely so.

I also have an anti-PETA Facebook group I started when younger and barely attend to.

 

I listed all those links for men that might be reading this, thinking they have no where to go if they've been victimized. Obviously, nobody thought to look into it.

You should be more outraged that THIS march doesn't acknowledge men as victims. They're not exactly lying about men being the offenders. According to the World Health Organization, male on male violence is the highest world wide. Basically, your odds of getting smacked around by a man are higher than mine. I don't care how many numbers you find or how much you state "female violence is rising sharply," your only proving it exists. Nobody can argue against that. It doesn't touch the issue that more men act out violently than women, and the victims are typically male. The troublesome thing about THIS march is that it reinforces the idea that male victims can't or shouldn't seek help.