and got co-opted by a bunch of psychopaths into the fucking terrible movement it is today.
Interesting. So In this theory of yours about how movements work, who exactly owns and dictates the movements? The ‘gov’ment’? The neighbour you hate? A woman calling the cops on someone? celebrities? People with opinions and jobs? A person with a magaphone/picket sign? Someone posting online?
What a weird question. No one specifically owns and dictates the feminist movement, and op didn’t imply that there was. The answer you’re demanding is at the core of cultural movements evolve, which is an incredibly complicated topic and I think it’s kind of shitty to ask this pose this question like some obvious truth they’re missing or something.
Modern feminist culture is incredibly poisonous, because its values were gradually eroded from bad actors. The people who dictate movements are simply the more passionate and convincing people that choose to try to. If a movement happens to have pretty vague ideas about its goals, it’s actually very easy to undermine its greater purpose to more nefarious specific goals. Or rather, it’s hard to keep from happening, because often the more selfish and destructive people are the ones who seem most passionate.
You’re going to get that anywhere and could go off with the same argument that everything is poisoned. To hate it you’re supporting it’s a movement is both a sum and to help serve individual requirements. Claiming bad actors is just a part of it. Helping others is another. You will get that in all movements. To define it so you can have some batting practice is reductive.
You’d spend your energy more wisely being additive with issues that need to get addressed. And focus on that.
Findings regarding bidirectional violence are particularly controversial because, if accepted, they can serve to undermine one of the most commonly cited reasons for female perpetrated IPV; self-defense against a controlling male partner.
They also stated if one examines who is physically harmed and how seriously, expresses more fear, and experiences subsequent psychological problems, domestic violence is significantly gendered toward women as victims.
As both Fiebert and Archer point out, although the numerical tally of physical acts in these studies has found similar rates of intimate partner violence amongst men and women, and high rates of bidirectionality, there is general agreement amongst researchers that male violence is a more serious phenomenon, primarily, but not exclusively, because male violence tends to inflict more psychological and physical damage than female violence.[3][79] Male violence produces injury at roughly six times the rate of female violence.[4] Women are also more likely to be killed by their male partners than the reverse (according to the US Department of Justice, 84% of spousal murder victims are female),[78] and women in general are more likely to be killed by their spouses than all other types of assailants combined.[80] In relation to this, Murray A. Straus has written “although women may assault their partners at approximately the same rate as men, because of the greater physical, financial, and emotional injury suffered by women, they are the predominant victims. Consequently, the first priority in services for victims and in prevention and control must continue to be directed toward assaults by husbands.”
Basically men right’s movement are using bad science. And if you are spreading the notion that feminism is just a bunch of sociopaths, then you are spreading misogyny / fascist propaganda.
Basically men right’s movement are using bad science.
Yes, bad science that considers mutual violence to be mutual violence, and not exclusively women defending themselves from violent men. Frankly, this is just another example of hyper/hypo-agency (basically men are treated as having more responsibility for their actions than they actually might and women are treated as having less - it’s the same tendency that plays into women getting lower bail when arrested, lower sentencing for the same crimes, that sort of thing, in this case that a woman engaging in IPV isn’t responsible for her violence, but rather responsibility for that violence belongs to the nearest man).
A fun followup for the reader: If women’s IPV is primarily defending themselves from violent men, what would that lead you to predict about rates of abuse in gay male and/or lesbian relationships, and does that prediction match reality?
Differences in physical harm basically come down to size/weight and if anyone is using a weapon. This basically means a petite woman should have open season to beat on her SO as much as she wants, but if he raises a hand in his own defense that makes him the abuser - he should just take it indefinitely. Or leave, because leaving an abusive partner is the easiest thing in the world if you aren’t a woman (see above about agency).
Fear expression is one of those things bound up in cultural nonsense - it’s unmanly to be scared of a girl, so most will process around that or just bottle it and refuse to express it. Related is why NISVS has a bad habit of getting results that suggest that women force men into non-consensual intercourse about as often as men do that to women in the previous year but then wildly different lifetime numbers - give it a few years where you’ve internalized the message that that’s not a thing that can happen to you because you’re a man and eventually you believe it.
Hell, I was sexually assaulted a couple of decades ago. Was playing driver for the group, had been up 22 hours because I’d had an early morning and we were doing a late night and when we made a stop for two of the people in the car that was going to take a bit, I leaned the seat back and napped with one other person in the vehicle (a woman). Woke up to her midway through performing a sex act on me, noticing the others were on the way back and her saying “I guess we’re more than just friends now.” Took me a decade to recognize that as sexual assault rather than just filing it away and trying to ignore it because that’s not something that happens to men.
The problem is that this topic is getting politicized by fascists. And some facts remain: 84% of spousal murder victims are female. This is what is happening today to overwhelming women. So if someone wants to post some emotionally manipulative meme to further fascist ideology, I’m not willing to engage in a debate about what men suffer. Because that is the strategy of the propaganda.
Campaigning for men’s rights is absolutely justified, but you have to do it far away from fascist propaganda.
Yes sexual dimorphism is the driving factor here, men on average have 60% more upper body strength and also longer arms. I could go around all day strangling women with my bare hands without much resistance. And that is why we have evolved social mechanisms to prevent that. That is not the same as discrimination against men.
In the meantime, men are still overwhelmingly murdering women.
someone getting helped isn’t a dig on someone else. That post is not addressing the issue. it’s nothing more than lateral infighting. Getting yourself heard isn’t poking holes in someone else’s life saver til you get what you want. That’s just being a psychopathic bully.
removed by mod
Imagine thinking that feminimism didn’t existed before 1970.
Way to go ignoring the entire history of feminism and its formation
LMFAO you are so propagandized
What did they say?
Interesting. So In this theory of yours about how movements work, who exactly owns and dictates the movements? The ‘gov’ment’? The neighbour you hate? A woman calling the cops on someone? celebrities? People with opinions and jobs? A person with a magaphone/picket sign? Someone posting online?
What a weird question. No one specifically owns and dictates the feminist movement, and op didn’t imply that there was. The answer you’re demanding is at the core of cultural movements evolve, which is an incredibly complicated topic and I think it’s kind of shitty to ask this pose this question like some obvious truth they’re missing or something.
Modern feminist culture is incredibly poisonous, because its values were gradually eroded from bad actors. The people who dictate movements are simply the more passionate and convincing people that choose to try to. If a movement happens to have pretty vague ideas about its goals, it’s actually very easy to undermine its greater purpose to more nefarious specific goals. Or rather, it’s hard to keep from happening, because often the more selfish and destructive people are the ones who seem most passionate.
What authors or activists do you think represents modern feminism and what makes upu think they are poisonous?
You’re going to get that anywhere and could go off with the same argument that everything is poisoned. To hate it you’re supporting it’s a movement is both a sum and to help serve individual requirements. Claiming bad actors is just a part of it. Helping others is another. You will get that in all movements. To define it so you can have some batting practice is reductive.
You’d spend your energy more wisely being additive with issues that need to get addressed. And focus on that.
There is debate about how this is measured and the scientific methodology: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domestic_violence_against_men#Gender_differences
Basically men right’s movement are using bad science. And if you are spreading the notion that feminism is just a bunch of sociopaths, then you are spreading misogyny / fascist propaganda.
Yes, bad science that considers mutual violence to be mutual violence, and not exclusively women defending themselves from violent men. Frankly, this is just another example of hyper/hypo-agency (basically men are treated as having more responsibility for their actions than they actually might and women are treated as having less - it’s the same tendency that plays into women getting lower bail when arrested, lower sentencing for the same crimes, that sort of thing, in this case that a woman engaging in IPV isn’t responsible for her violence, but rather responsibility for that violence belongs to the nearest man).
A fun followup for the reader: If women’s IPV is primarily defending themselves from violent men, what would that lead you to predict about rates of abuse in gay male and/or lesbian relationships, and does that prediction match reality?
Differences in physical harm basically come down to size/weight and if anyone is using a weapon. This basically means a petite woman should have open season to beat on her SO as much as she wants, but if he raises a hand in his own defense that makes him the abuser - he should just take it indefinitely. Or leave, because leaving an abusive partner is the easiest thing in the world if you aren’t a woman (see above about agency).
Fear expression is one of those things bound up in cultural nonsense - it’s unmanly to be scared of a girl, so most will process around that or just bottle it and refuse to express it. Related is why NISVS has a bad habit of getting results that suggest that women force men into non-consensual intercourse about as often as men do that to women in the previous year but then wildly different lifetime numbers - give it a few years where you’ve internalized the message that that’s not a thing that can happen to you because you’re a man and eventually you believe it.
Hell, I was sexually assaulted a couple of decades ago. Was playing driver for the group, had been up 22 hours because I’d had an early morning and we were doing a late night and when we made a stop for two of the people in the car that was going to take a bit, I leaned the seat back and napped with one other person in the vehicle (a woman). Woke up to her midway through performing a sex act on me, noticing the others were on the way back and her saying “I guess we’re more than just friends now.” Took me a decade to recognize that as sexual assault rather than just filing it away and trying to ignore it because that’s not something that happens to men.
The problem is that this topic is getting politicized by fascists. And some facts remain: 84% of spousal murder victims are female. This is what is happening today to overwhelming women. So if someone wants to post some emotionally manipulative meme to further fascist ideology, I’m not willing to engage in a debate about what men suffer. Because that is the strategy of the propaganda.
Campaigning for men’s rights is absolutely justified, but you have to do it far away from fascist propaganda.
Yes sexual dimorphism is the driving factor here, men on average have 60% more upper body strength and also longer arms. I could go around all day strangling women with my bare hands without much resistance. And that is why we have evolved social mechanisms to prevent that. That is not the same as discrimination against men.
In the meantime, men are still overwhelmingly murdering women.
Hating women isn’t how to support men. Your post is toxic. You are toxic.
Sounds to me like he’s hating on those women who coopted the feminist movement specifically, and not on women in general.
And they think those are Brits in the 70’s…
someone getting helped isn’t a dig on someone else. That post is not addressing the issue. it’s nothing more than lateral infighting. Getting yourself heard isn’t poking holes in someone else’s life saver til you get what you want. That’s just being a psychopathic bully.