Don’t go running at night, they warn us. It’s not safe. So we go for a run in the morning, on a mild Sunday near our home. And we are murdered. Like Samantha Murphy. Don’t go home with someone you don’t know, they say. It’s dangerous. So we walk home alone. And we are murdered. Like Jill Meagher.
I mean this with respect, but... What do you want us (men) to do?
There is evil in the world. It's not a man or a woman thing. It is a good vs evil thing. It is a spiritual thing. It is a repent and call on God thing.
There are things we (men) can do to help...if we're allowed. All too often in this world men are condemned for being men.
We've destroyed the ability for our boys to grow up and become protectors be demonizing all of the male traits that lead to boys becoming men who are protectors.
We took away recess and P.E. and told boys to quite roughhousing.
We told boys to treat girls equally and not open doors for them or give up seats for them.
We implemented zero tolerance policies in schools that equally punish bullies and those who stand up to them.
We put dresses on them and tell them it's acceptable to dominate girls in women's sports.
We gave them access to unlimited porn and wonder why they don't resect women.
We portray men in popular culture as feckless, hopeless, weak, and stupid.
We celebrate effiminate men while denigrating manly men.
We've spent decades preaching that no woman needs a man.
We've eliminated any distinction between the sexes to the point where being a man or a woman is largely a matter of whim decided by how one feels rather than how one is born.
We've demonized and denigrated and reduced the value of being a man so much that most men have no idea how to act like one.
In short, we've done this to ourselves. Women have contributed to this. Mothers no longer teach their sons to stand up for the weak and vulnerable because we refuse to admit that anyone is weak and vulnerable. Fathers have contributed by abandoning their families and failing to show their sons what it means to be a real man.
We've virtue signaled our sons out of manhood and now we wonder why they don't act like men.
For starters, they want us to take the problem more seriously.
When we say dumb shit like "It's not a man or a woman thing.", we're not taking it seriously.
When among the first things out of our mouth in response is defensive numbnuttery like "men are condemned for being men", we're not taking it seriously.
Women demonize male violence (like in this article - see?).
Women don't demonize men for not being violent.
We need to pay more attention, time, effort and resources to the problem of violence, and catching it early rather than laughing it off.
For Christ's sake let's stop complaining about not getting enough cookies for not being a homicidal maniac.
GROW UP. Be a man.
Who doesn't whine, who holds other men accountable when they lack self-control.
Who takes pride in his own mature temperament and wisdom as much as he does in his strength.
Who doesn't blame women for his own weakness.
Who doesn't take his advantages for granted.
Who celebrates and rejoices in female sensibleness, wisdom, clear and caring vision, and just laughs affectionately at the women when they are their ridiculously mean and petty and crazy selves, rather than screaming at them.
We men are at the top of the freakin' world. The women fall all over themselves to defer to us and please us and bid for our attention, whether we earn it or not.
Let's appreciate our manhood, and the servant-leader role we get to play.
Read my original comment again. I did not dismiss the issue. The author was bemoaning why men won't stand up for women. I pointed out some of the reasons. Do some men commit violence against women? Yes. Do most men oppose it? Yes.
But I would argue that the reason some men do not do more is because of the way they are treated when they try to get involved. One need only read the comments directed towards me here to see an example. If you ask men to help then treat them badly when they get involved I'm not sure what you would expect to happen.
If we don't get fathers involved in raising their sons, and we don't start teaching our boys how to be responsible, Godly men, and we don't stop telling them to go away when they try to get involved we will never raise another generation that exults and protects women. Radical feminism and male blaming will not solve the problem.
You must have been reading a different article. Also, I don't know whom you are including in "godly men", but violence against women is not limited to the non-religious.
That your response to a woman's murder is essentially that liberal politics has ruined men's ability to be responsible for their own actions is telling. And your continuing to push your original point in every subsequent comment is indeed dismissing the issue.
This wasn’t just an article about a woman’s murder. The author and many of the commenters here have taken a wanton scattershot approach to venting their frustration and anger and have provided sloppy and emotional reasoning for doing so.
If you feel justified in drawing non-perpetrators into an emotional scree, at least be prepared to be addressed by the innocent and otherwise sympathetic targets of your wrath.
Many women here seem to have become accustomed to men adopting an avoidant strategy to avoid a confrontation with an irrational geyser of emotion and cannot handle being called to account for the vicious unreason they direct at others.
This comment has been brought to you by the same people who think all immigrants should be deported because of one murder, all Muslims are terrorists and all black men are thugs.
In other words, we're applying their own standards to the crime white men commit and it's just so unfair.
Next Spilling will once again claim that we're all overreacting because he knows as a white man that that's what women do.
🙄
You know, Spilling, you should have your home town declared a nature preserve. Because I didn't know your kind existed in the wild anymore.
I watch Sesame Street almost every Sunday morning when my mom will let me, and they said that's not good to make people into groups with other people who are different just because they seem the same. They said that was bad.
This message was brought to you by the letter "S."
S is for circle. And other words that I can't think of right now.
Overall the point is that if you wish to impact the incidence of anti-social violence, the policies that either constrain or embolden the people most apt to perpetuate that violence are important to countenance with some clear-eyed critical evaluation.
All of society has an investment in the outcome, and policies which produce more disaffected and poorly socialized young men will lead to more crime, more suffering, and I guess more crying and screaming and whining to the well-behaved men who keep trying to steer you towards a better set of solutions.
Wrong. Read the article again. The author was bemoaning the fact that women are in danger from male violence all the time, and men aren't getting how big of a problem it is. Not "why men won't stand up for women", whatever that means.
To respond to such an article with any amount of complaining about how hard things are for men in other ways, is trying to change the subject, which is itself an example of the problem the article is pointing out.
The ways in which men have to do more are mainly about holding other men more accountable, and devoting more time, energy and resources toward that.
What you are calling" the way they are treated when they try to get involved" has nothing to do with that.
The way you are being treated in these comments has nothing to do with that. You're being treated badly because you're saying stupid things, not because you're a man.
You are playing a childish game of tit-for-tat, when the topic is a serious, adult one of female vulnerability to and fear of violence from men, which is something that men do not experience nearly to the same degree as women do.
Men need to make more of an effort to understand the harm that such fear and lack of safety causes for women.
And that needs to happen regardless of whether men get the visitation/custody schedule they want when they divorce.
One more time - you're using an article about women's feelings about MALE VIOLENCE TOWARD WOMEN, to vent your unrelated frustrations with women, and how society treats men.
Stopping boys from picking on each other isn't going to help with male violence.
More popular culture portrayals of male heroes as hyper-angry, hyper-macho, hyper-violent, emotionally disconnected, robotic revenge machines isn't going to help with male violence. If anything it makes it worse.
More popular culture portrayals of women as hopelessly dependent on men will only feed male egos with unrealistic expectations.
Nearly all the things that you think more of would make things better, have been making things worse for years.
It's fine if you don't want to actually talk about the problem. Lots of people here agree with what I said. I think many people reading this will have a more open mind to the thoughts I was trying to convey and will clearly see who is being unreasonable.
But I refuse to blame ALL men for the violence of some. To do so is unreasonable and irrational. The problem will never be solved without the help of men so continuing to angrily denigrate them solves nothing and leads nowhere. God bless!
I'm with you on the rape kit thing. I think most men are - most men who aren't politicians. I say we take the money we're sending to foreign countries that mean nothing to us and use that to fund rape kit testing. Heck, let's throw in DNA testing for other things too. Basically, if we have DNA let's test it.
Here's a thought, what if we shut down all the illegal biolabs the CIA seems to have set up everywhere and use that money to fund DNA testing labs?
I'm sorry your mom skipped health class when she homeschooled you.
Seriously, some woman probably thinks you're an okay human being. I don't care what you say to me because well, because I've read your BS but don't repeat that to a woman who might think better of you.
This sounds like victim blaming, women aren't asking the right men to stand up for them? One of the presidential candidates has been convicted of sexual assault/rape and denigrates women on a daily basis in the news and is rewarded for that behavior. That's the example set. Violence against women is institutional and widely accepted, so until the ERA is ratified there is nothing the institutions can do to change themselves without the political will of every man who is in a position of power. Scroll back from all the nonsense you're using as a shield against the charge and look at the basic reality of women's lives in the US. Your wife and daughters are not full citizens. Think about that. And then read Backlash by Susan Faludi and you might have the thinnest grasp about what's really happening. Asking the good hard questions about why violence against women continues to escalate is not assaulting you personally. It's not about you, it's about them.
"For starters, they want us to take the problem more seriously."
If you want to take the problem seriously you might like to start with not objectifying women as passive, inert, objects with no agency. Men are by far the greatest victims of violence and always have been, but violence against women is a far greater crime for this simple reason: society values women more than men.
Women value women more than men, and men also value women more than men. Gynocentrism (and chivalry) is hard wired into the human species. When Boko Harem kidnapped a bunch of schoolgirls this caused international outrage - and the story was framed as evidence of just how much the world hates and abuses women. Nobody EVEN THOUGHT to ask what happened to the boys and if they were alright. That is how much of an empathy gap we have. The boys were all murdered in cold blood in the classroom.
If that threatens your identity as a man you need to deal with it. At least acknowledge it. Thanks to biology/ hormones etc women tend to over estimate their vulnerability and victimhood, and men tend to over estimate their invulnerability and privilege. Women are neurotic and risk adverse, and men are careless risk takers. If we can’t accept basic biological truths and have EMPATHY for how each sex sees (and feels) the world and their place in it then there is no point in even trying to address a topic like this.
Feeding women's natural neuroticism (a trait perfectly suited to the role of mother BTW) for your own personal gain (white knighting) is really a kind of 'soft terrorism'. Governments and the UN are full of pointless men who's high salaried career is justified by telling women just how vulnerable they are and how dangerous men are. It's just exploiting biological hard wiring.
“Women demonize male violence “
No. Women demonise, glorify, celebrate and demand male violence in equal measure. In high crime neighbourhoods studies show women select the most violent men with a criminal record and jail time as partners. Women have always adored (and sexualised) soldiers and police, who are men specifically trained to be violent (and to be killers). Women want male violence to be in service to women and children. See also: the rest of the natural world. Men and women are two halves of the same organism. Men are the protective outer shell. Part of the protection men provide is their capacity to be violent when necessary.
Obviously, men’s capacity for violence requires careful handling, just as women’s sexual power and fertility does too. Traditionally, fathers taught their sons how to be 'real men' (literally GENTLE men), which meant learning restraint. But feminism kicked men out of the home, demonised traditional masculinity (to be replaced by chads and metrosexuals) and encouraged - and financially incentivised - single mother households, which has given us several generations of men unable to handle their masculinity with any restraint (as well as generations of women unable to handle their femininity with restraint too). Studies show that fathers instil restraint in boys AND girls. But we got rid of fathers in the name of 'saving women' from 'the patriarchy'. As a result we got gang culture and its equally toxic counterpart: 'white knighting' men. Neither make life safer or better for women and children (or for men for that matter).
"We men are at the top of the freakin' world."
Men score LOWER than women by every conceivable metric (homelessness, access to healthcare, conviction/ sentencing inequality, access to shelters, reproductive autonomy, life expectancy, access to socialised services, the draft, access to children, divorce law etc).
Men also receive much less EMPATHY/ SYMPATHY which is why you (as a man) must work much harder than women to get social approval (and be considered a 'real man'). You do this by throwing your fellow men under the bus and then acting as society’s one good chivalrous man, in a sea of horrid misogynistic men. Women band together and play the victim., while men throw each other under the bus and play the lone hero on to of the pile. We can't really avoid this hard wiring, but to not be aware of it (and to indulge in it) means we will never be able to even understand gender relations, much less improve anything.
The other commenter was right. The science and the studies are clear: if you want to create a society with less violence/ crime/ gang culture/ promiscuity/ underage pregnancy you just need to repair the broken home, and specifically get fathers back into the home. The only way to do that is to undo decades of feminist propaganda and feminist changes to the legal system.
But to do THAT means having to give up the idea men are/ were to blame for all social ills, and having to accept that you - as a man - are NOT fully responsible for the state of society. Women are AT LEAST 50% responsible. This means having to give up the idea that men have all the power, and having to hand half of that power BACK to women (together with the sense of SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY that goes with it). Acknowledging women's power (women's agency) threatens the identity of most modern (post feminist) men to the core.
“The women fall all over themselves to defer to us and please us and bid for our attention, whether we earn it or not.”
This is part of the feminist Male Power Fantasy. The hard reality is that our society would never tolerate a ‘she for he' campaign, much less fund one and cheer for it at the UN. The idea that women have ANY responsibility to serve men in any way is regarded as pure sexism and misogyny. "Kill all women" would never become a popular and celebrated hashtag like "Kill all men" was. We'd never accept a social obligation to raise children properly as stay at home mothers, the way we accept men's duty to keep the power stations running and the global transport and food distribution system operational. Is proper parenting any less important that electric lighting and internationally shipped foods? Apparently it is much less important. We even financially incentivise out of wedlock pregnancy and broken homes, despite knowing the social breakdown and higher crime it causes - including the danger it puts women in. And we call it 'women's empowerment'.
You see, the idea that women have any role to play in improving society is now a taboo concept. Women are, after all, just passive objects, right? Having agency is only for men, right?
Women's only role now is to play the eternal victim and make ever more hysterical appeals to feminist men to solve society's problems by throwing even more men under the bus. Yeah, that will solve it! :)
1. Raising children properly (ie not abusing them/ neglecting them) is not 'worshipping men'.
2. "Who taught you that whining was manly?" - You have just implied that whining is uniquely feminine behaviour, and/ or a privilege reserved exclusively for women.
3. "Manhood comes with terrific advantages and privileges" - As I already pointed out men score LOWER than women by every possible metric of 'privilege'.
You used the word 'manhood', rather than male. It's worth pointing out that manhood (unlike womanhood) is a status which men have to earn by showing positive male qualities (courage, responsibility, honesty, diligence, restraint and a willingness to protect and provide for the women in his life). The reason why feminists often think men are 'privileged' is because they are focusing on those specific men who have worked hard to earn their 'manhood' status. By contrast, women earn the status of womanhood simply by becoming fertile and capable of bearing children.
The reason why so many post feminist women are full of angst, envy and low self esteem is that they have been trained by feminist ideology to aspire to manhood, but without actually taking the steps that men take to achieve that social status. Instead they continue to enhance their femininity, but with little interest in traditional pair bonding and motherhood they just und up becoming professional victims (damsels) who spit on men, while simultaneously appealing to men to be rescued ("he for she").
4. "One of those is stepping up and taking the lead in matters of protection from physical violence." - Demanding male protection when in public is nothing new. It's called chaperones, chivalry and traditional gender roles and social ettiquette. Feminism demanded we do away with all of that. Society complied. Then feminists demanded we do away with the concept of stay-at-home motherhood and fathers in the home, BOTH of which are necessary to raise children properly, and prevent them from growing up to become monsters. Again, society complied to feminists' demands.
And now here we are.
What you are essentially doing is trying to slow down the 18 wheeler by applying more pressure to the gas pedal. And when someone like me gets on the radio and suggests maybe taking the foot off the gas and applying it to the break pedal instead, you just fly off the handle and punch the radio.
1. You are hand-waving. Women getting murdered by men despite taking all reasonable precautions and male violence in general is the issue, not your feelings. Get over yourself.
2. Here you are, still whining, instead of stepping up and being a man who accepts his responsibilities.
3. Yep. Still whining, and pretending that as men we don't have things really, really good in our society. Embarrassing.
4. No, feminism didn't demand any of that. Feminism demanded equal respect for women. Period.
You and your fellow immature men made up the rest, in a childish tantrum-response to feminism that amounts to "Oh yeah?! Well if I'm not allowed to occasionally abuse my privilege of physical superiority over women, then I don't have to use it to help physically protect them either!"
It's like if women responded to admonishments not to smoke and drink to excess during pregnancy by saying "Fine! YOU bear the children then!"
The biggest determining factor for male violence (and female violence) is abuse, neglect and lack of male influence (ie present father) during childhood.
So there's your solution. If you want to make society safer, you just need to promote responsible mate selection by women, no children outside of marriage, a strong stable family home and a society which allows fathers to support a family so that the mother is free to raise her children properly.
If you want to make society even more safe for women after that, you need to promote a return of chivalry, chaperones and traditional gender roles and social conventions.
These are the things you are demanding, even if you don't yet realise it...... or don't want to admit it.
Countless social studies with actors and hidden cameras have shown that men will pounce on any man who appears to be harassing or attacking a woman in public, but they will do nothing when a woman is harassing or attacking a man in public.
Women display the same reaction, except they are more likely to smirk, cheer, clap and even encourage a woman who appears to be harassing or attacking a man in public.
So we know the problem is not men. Men are chivalrous and gynocentric by nature. It's hard wired into men to be that way.
The men you are complaining about are BROKEN men, and we already know what breaks men - broken homes, abusive and neglected childhoods, lack of fathers etc. So that's what we need to fix :)
The men who rape, abuse, and murder are "real" men. What do you think they are? Ghosts? Apparitions?
Men have been doing this for thousands of years. It's only now that women can actually say something about it. Don't fucking act like this is the result of modern FeMiNiSmS making you feel bad about male violence.
You did exactly what the problem is--act like males like you have nothing to do with it because "it's not a man or woman thing."
IT IS A MAN THING. Male violence is the problem. You won't even fucking admit that it exists! That is the problem right there. From India to the Congo to the US to Italy.
Thanks for proving that males are the issue. And you're too fucking dumb to see it. That attitude, this right here, is the reason it's a problem in the first place, and it's innate.
What do women want? STOP FUCKING CAUSING THE PROBLEM. Go talk to men, not leave comments acting like nothing is even happening.
The author of the article wants men to protect women. How? By simply not attacking women?
What is the cause of male violence? Put it into words. You cannot stop that which you cannot describe. Are you saying it's an inate male trait to inflict violence on women? That's absurd.
You want us men to go "talk to men" and say what? Don't be violent to women? Are you actually being serious? There are millions of men who have never been violent towards women, will never be violent towards women, and do not think violence towards women is acceptable. But you put us all in the same bucket, blaming all men for the actions of the few then wonder why men aren't springing to your defense?
I ask what you would have us do and you insult me and ridicule me and all other men instead of having a rational conversation about what an acceptable solution might be.
Whatever the solution, I'd guess it would begin by treating men with the same respect you would have us treat women.
The idea that this problem as described is a universal male problem and not a societal problem is shallow and unserious.
Respect ! I think we’re way past talking about respect and fully into anger. Men just have no idea of the constant safety measures we have to take. You say not all men and I say, it’s always a man.
Yes, that's what I want you to do. Stop crying and saying IT'S NOT ALL and tell men to stop acting so fucking stupid.
You're here hijacking and gaslighting when women point out a problem, if you can do this you can address the problem with males who are the actual cause. The fact that it doesn't occur to you to even do that, while this is fine as you deny it's even a male violence problem, proves my point. Thanks for making it so easy.
Yes, it is innate for males to be stupid and violent, and as a result even unable to recognize that they are the problem. It's universal, from China to Honduras to Afghanistan to Ukraine. That's because male stupidity and violence is universal, since it's innate.
Thank you. Some of us would like to make these bastards die horribly. But...we see issues with doing so if we will be prosecuted like Daniel Penny or Kyle Rittenhouse for restoring order.
Reality is some groups commit crimes at an extremely different rate. Disparate impact would be very clear if we could truly protect. Almost sure this Kat also supports intersectional thinking too.
What male wants to lose everything protecting a random female today?
Maybe if women would support this by not convicting those who do what is truly right rather than what is legal when they sit on a jury?
Well heck, China was doing it to females on a pretty large scale for a while there.
And we already do it with livestock and sport stock, why not men?
Castrate most of them young, raise a few for breeding selection in confinement.
Have you seen how they extract semen from stallions and bulls? Mighty effective. Think suction, lots of it. And on the other end of the process, VERY large turkey-basters.
Less romantic perhaps, but no domestic violence!
Ever wonder what happens to male chicks at the hatchery? Right into the grinder.
Now with bees, the males just hang out and have sex with the queen.
Yes, China was doing it to females. They also exterminated the sparrow. Both are cautionary tales, not achievements to be emulated.
Only permitting a few males to breed means the next generation are mostly siblings. Inbreeding is sometimes desirable in livestock. Brothers and sisters are bred together all the time. It's a way to bring out any defective recessive genes by concentrating them. The defective animals are then culled, the few that didn't inherit the defective genes are then outbred. This selective breeding (and selective extermination) when applied to humans, is called eugenics. It's a guaranteed route to genocide and other crimes against humanity. We already played this game. It didn't end well.
You seem to be deeply discontented with human beings and wish to be a member of a non-human species. The transhumanists will welcome you
If you can hijack articles about male violence and deny it even exists, then you can do something else with your life. Go away. Talk to idiot males because they are the problem.
Go talk to these guys. This upcoming generation is turning out great, what with male role models like you out there.
I never claimed male violence doesn't exist. Don't put words in my mouth. I asked what we should do about it. You are claiming nothing can be done because men are inherently violent then you told me to go away and go tell men to stop being violent.
I'm not really sure what you want except to get the last rude word in. Your arguments are incoherent and hateful.
Fully agree with you Jason. Just to reflect for a second, I hear a lot of anger in this piece and in this thread from women who really just want the reality of violence by men against women to be acknowledged, so I just want to say that I do hear that, and I do recognize the reality of that, and that that reality is truly awful and probably impossible to imagine, as a man, at least not fully. It's something I surely don't think about enough and the fact that I can even say that is a privilege.
I have to imagine that most men, many of whom have women in their lives who are important to them (myself included), and many of whom are just decent human beings, want nothing more than to see this reckoned with. I think then, as a man, it's painful to read something like this, first because of the tragedy of it, obviously, but second because when the proposed solution is to simply lay the problem at men's feet, it feels like we're missing an opportunity to really understand it. I don't say this to hijack the conversation and center it on men, but to think more deeply about the problem.
I don't know a lot about violence, but the root causes seem complex. Why are some men violent and not others? Childhood trauma, parenting experiences, our culture around masculinity, poverty and social status--all of these are surely involved. It's going to take a societal effort to work on these things. Yes, men will be at the center of that, but we'll need fathers, mothers, sisters, brothers, friends, cousins, aunts, uncles, grandparents, husbands, wives, teachers, and classmates to be involved too.
I totally understand the impulse to be angry or find blame here too. It's deeply unfair that women disproportionately bear the consequences of this. But blaming men is like blaming homelessness on houses. Yes, houses are directly involved, as are men in these cases, but these problems are deep and complex and hard. We all, unfortunately, have to reconckon with them.
And again, I fully hear and acknowledge the anger here. It's not fair, and this isn't something I spend enough time thinking about, so I appreciate the piece and the opportunity to do that.
Considering a vast majority of men (nearly all, if we're being honest) have never and will never attack a woman I guess we're already protecting them...making this article and these conversations pointless.
If only the men who ARE attacking women would read this they'd probably just stop because we told them too. Problem solved, I guess.
His is the same kind of bullshit that racists pull on Black people. Well I don't see any slaves around me now and I don't have any slaves myself, so its all over then! It's all about meeeeee! You people of color need to explain to white what to do and tell us how to figure it all out, and feel bad for us too because it makes me uncomfortable! Ugh, sit down. Entitlement sucks and it's a big waste of time.
"The men who rape, abuse, and murder are "real" men. What do you think they are? Ghosts? Apparitions?"
In a sense yes. They are BROKEN men. Violent men are typically the victims of childhood abuse, neglect, torture, humiliation and the constant disapproval of a society which has already defined them as 'the problem' and shows them no empathy whatsoever. Sexually violent men tend to have suffered childhood abuse/ humiliation at the hands of a female, generally the mother.
Men who were NOT broken as children do not commit murder, rape or any other anti social acts.
Men are no different to dogs. Abuse them and neglect them as pups and you will end up with a dog that bites people or just gets up in their faces and barks.
We all understand what produces unruly and dangerous dogs. It's their OWNERS - the people who got a dog on a whim, or for vanity reasons, and then failed to make the PROPER COMMITMENT and SACRIFICES necessary to train it properly and care for it properly. We all understand this perfectly well. When a dog is unruly and dangerous we point the finger of blame at the person who raised it.
The exact same principle applies to people. But the problem is that this draws attention to women's RESPONSIBILITY with respect to (1) responsible mate selection (2) responsible reproduction (3) proper parenting.
Raising a dog AND raising children BOTH require huge sacrifices if you want them to not turn out unruly and violent. For children that means being a stay at home mother with a husband who can support the whole baby making enterprise. Children are MORE of a responsibility than dogs, but we live in a society where children are now regarded as a kind of fashion accessory. Well, there are consequences to that kind of mentality.
All of the social conventions we threw out in the name of 'empowering women' and 'smashing the patriarchy' were specifically designed to ensure a safe, stable, loving family home in which to raise normal, well adjusted children with a both mother and father present and active throughout childhood and ZERO interference from the state or minimum wage strangers (AKA daycare).
So either we have traditional families again with stay at home mothers and fathers present ....... OR we have to accept having gang culture, 'bro' culture, high crime, promiscuity, teenage pregnancy and a hyper-sexualised culture with no restraint.
I couldn’t agree more. Like it or not, we need each other. Mothers to be good kind strong mothers to their sons, fathers to be good strong kind men to their sons. Mothers to be good strong kind mothers to their daughters. Fathers to be good kind and strong for their daughters. And for all of us to collectively remember, men aren’t all evil. Women aren’t all weak.
You're exactly wrong. Male violence is the problem. Acting like men aren't ALL evil because they haven't raped and murdered and should get a medal for that is the problem right there.
The only thing that has ever controlled male violence is strong protective men. Men control men.
It's a pattern that isn't even limited to our species. Older male cougars police the young dumb male cougars. A territory with an older male cougar has few cougar attacks on pets and children. Let a trophy hunter take out the policecat and a bunch of adolescent males move in. Feline gangbangers.
Back to humans. In an effort to make men less violent, the culture as a whole decided to make as many men as possible as weak as possible.
The result has been that the predators are just as predatory, but the protectors are gone, powerless, or demoralized.
1. People aren't animals, our expectations for men are higher than that.
2. You've seen too many movies and TV and video games with hyper-violent, hyper-macho, hyper-unrealistic male protagonists and now you think any man that isn't like that is lame.
3, The actual key is self-control. Teaching boys and young men not to fly off the handle and wreck things/other people when they're pissed doesn't make them weak.
Human beings ARE animals. We're primates. Great apes. Mammals. Our social structures and brains aren't that different, though our technology is quite different. One of the unusual aspects of our species is that we prey on our own species.
One of the things that makes men angry is violence against women. And yes, they tend to fly off the handle and wreck rapists. Maybe that's a better option than just giving them a stern talking-to.
Predators don't fear a scolding. They fear a beating.
I’m not sure you have that completely right. Understanding the primal heritage embedded in our nature is fairly essential to avoiding the misapprehension of causes and the misapplication of misguided prescriptions. Expecting to extirpate or entirely suppress that nature can invite very counterproductive and unwanted - even violent - repercussions.
What culture? Who is making who weak? What the fuck are you even talking about? Men are entering women's swimming competitions and getting away with it.
If men control men, what the fuck is going on in Afghanistan? GO TALK TO THEM.
Idiots who defend male stupidity are the lowest of the low. You morons literally live in a dream world. Stop making a fool of yourself.
Men are the problem. They're not appalled at men like WIlliam "Lia" Thomas. They laugh at it, or they just don't care. It doesn't affect them so they don't care. If that wasn't true, it wouldn't be happening in the first place.
Most women don't support this. The ones who go along with it are dumb, but if the males weren't so stupid in the first place, there wouldn't be anything to go along with. If every woman stopped supporting it, men would still do it. That's the difference. Men are the origin of the problem.
Go talk to men. They are the origin of every issue.
Seriously? ALL The men in my life are strong, kind, smart, protective and provide for their families. I have sons who are the same. Gaslighting? What even is that. And if you think the female of our species have no capacity for violence you are seriously mistaken
In my neighborhood, very few people go out at 2am if they can possibly avoid it. The rate of injury is unacceptably high. The vast majority of people who are physically injured at 2am are men, often younger men who were just trying to get home from the late shift.
And when you don’t get the answer you want to hear in your echo chamber you resort to calling people stupid …. Not particularly helpful, but for what it’s worth no man I know nor my sons have ever committed violence against a woman. Can I at least get some respect for that? Or do I get lumped into ‘stupid people’ category because I happen to think drugs, alcohol, mental health disease and perhaps just some plain bad and not just mad, men kill women? Sorry Kat, disagreeing with your opinion doesn’t make me stupid
If you told the guys waging war in the Ukraine, gang-raping tourists in India, beating their wives in Afghanistan, that they were "weak" what do you think they would say?
This is a terrible take. Both men and women live in this world. Demonising and blaming is a guaranteed pathway to failure. There are so many contradictions in how people think these days. I bet you wouldn’t appreciate us labelling ALL women as x. Too little honesty and understanding and too much hubris and self-righteousness.
Males got away with labeling ALL women all sorts of things for thousands of years, and they were fine with it. Nobody batted an eyelash, and they still don't.
Don't start crying now when males are getting called out for their bullshit and they can't get away with legally beating their wives to death anymore (well, at least in some parts of the world).
I find it incredibly sad when people treat others poorly or with such disregard and excuse it away based on their negative perception of things others, note, others, have done in the past. It’s all too common now—no patience, no understanding, just hate, ambivalence or complete apathy. Hate begets hate. This is literally the first time you and I have interacted and look at the vitriol. Based on what? Your assumption, based solely on the belief simply that I potentially wield the same gender as those that may have wronged you in the past. My suggestion to you would be to stop reading hate literature and pick up something cheerier. Go out of your way to be nice to others and smile more. There are bad people, but believe it or not they’re in the minority, man or woman. If you allow someone to ruin your day over and over, eventually they’ll start ruining your week, then your month—before long all you’ll know is hate and you’ll be lashing out online at people you’ve never met. I wish you the best.
It seems to me the only reason they can’t get away with it is because other men won’t stand for it. Clearly based on the tenor of many of the pleading responses here it’s not because women have suddenly learned how to physically impose themselves on men.
And very few of the men around now are thousands of years old.
Undoubtedly, women face unique challenges and threats and I wouldn't diminish or ignore them. At the same time, many men suffer from their own difficulties, for these reasons:
1) Men are humans with feelings, too -- including anxiety and fear.
2) Men make up the majority of crime victims (and perpetrators, as well).
3) The vast majority of people killed during wartime are male, on either side of the conflict.
4) In line with point #3, the majority of homeless people are male, often as a result of their participation in combat for which they're given meager recompense.
5) Divorce proceedings frequently benefit one half of the relationship (the woman) to the detriment of the other half (the man). Then, the children suffer because they must navigate a fraught familial dynamic... and let's not forget that some of those children are boys.
They do not have the ability to engage in self-criticism and awareness. They will hijack and turn every conversation into how they are the real victims because they're too self-absorbed to see that they are the problem.
Dang it. I agreed with you thinking you meant "Like this" referring to yourself. With no visual cues it's so hard to know. I'm also a sucker for the word "Indeed." It sounds so smart.
I didn't even get a like from you though. What the heck.
An article about male violence and dead women, and you IMMEDIATELY have to hijack, interrupt, change the subject, and act like men are the real victims because men are so fucking dumb they kill each other and themselves too.
Thanks for proving the point. Male stupidity is the problem. Shut the fuck up about divorce. STOP HIJACKING EVERY FUCKING CONVERSATION ABOUT THE MALE PROBLEM.
I think we have arrived at the nut meat here: male stupidity! Only men can really write stupid shit like this after reading the original post! For Christ's sake!
If you say that men are stupid because they engage in and suffer from violence more frequently, what would you say about aboriginal people in Australia, who engage in and suffer from violence more frequently still? Along with saying men are stupid, are you saying aboriginal people are stupid?
And if you would say that aboriginal people are less responsible because the circumstances of their lives make violence more likely, might we also find that similar considerations can apply for working class men?
Things become more difficult if you want to go beyond, "men bad!" in a discussion, looking instead at the broader contributors to violence. As with a public health issue like obesity, there are many factors contributing to it, and many manifestations of it as a problem.
1) studies show that man and women experience fear differently, particularly in violent intimate partner relationships.
2) men are not the majority of casualties from intimate partners violence. Women are by far.
3) studies show that women and children pay very high costs for war. Also it is government policy to not draft women and it was government policy for a long time to limit the jobs women could occupy on the military. These decisions are made by men, not women.
4) veterans are given lifelong compensation for disabilities suffered in conflict. They are also compensated for participating in conflict in the first place — pay that female veterans didn’t have access to.
5) divorce overwhelmingly causes women to take a financial hit. Women also pay a motherhood tax that reduces their earnings to start with.
I would respond to #2, that women are primarily the victims of intimate partner violence, which is absolutely true. But the authour Freedman also mentioned stranger violence. So she is not asking why women are subject to domestic violence, or stranger violence - she's complaining that women are subject to violence at all.
Which is a fair complaint, but then it's reasonable to respond that men and impoverished minorities like aboriginal people are far more likely to suffer violence than a middle-class white woman like the authour or the vicitim of the horrendous crime which evidently inspired this article.
Do you think maybe the immediate cause of women dying at the hands of their intimate partners (a leading cause of death for women) is problems with policing and the criminal justice system that have always ensured violence against women is not taken seriously?
Do you think maybe it’s exacerbated because women cannot leave a dangerous space as easily as men can?
Did you know a leading cause of death in men is also violence…but from other men?
Did you know that over half of the homicides against women occur in the private sphere, whereas only 12% of homicides against men do? Does it strike you as odd that women are likelier to be killed by the men who purportedly love them than by anyone else?
Did you know that the rates of violence from men towards women have been relatively consistent over time — that they didn’t rise significantly just because women obtained more legal rights or began working or any other advances that might have empowered women to “emasculate” men?
Just curious what actual research you’ve done into data on men and rates of violence before attributing these highly specific causal factors to it.
"Do you think maybe the immediate cause of women dying at the hands of their intimate partners (a leading cause of death for women) is problems with policing and the criminal justice system that have always ensured violence against women is not taken seriously?"
In the last full year of reporting 2020-21, there were 25 women victims of partner homicide; see p38 of the linked pdf. This is the lowest number recorded in the period covered by the report since 1989-90. I would not characterise 25 deaths as a "leading cause of death".
"Both the domestic and acquaintance homicide rates have halved since 1989‒90." (p7)
So while these are horrendous crimes, they are decreasing over time. This suggests that while there may still be problems with the system taking women victims seriously, it's considerably improved over the last generation. Things can and should get better - but they are improving, and we should be glad of that.
People defend, protect and/or control the things they own, irrespective of how they think they feel about it. For women to have agency in a society, there needs to be a broader change to the subtext that women are a thing that is owned.
Rachel, no one in the civilized world believes women are a thing to be owned. Bad things happen because evil people exist. It's not like our male children are growing up thinking it's OK to murder women.
The article argues that men should do a better job of defending women. Are you arguing that men will only defend women if we feel we own them? Your second sentence literally contradicts the first. Are you arguing that woman can only be protected if they "have" agency? Our vice president is a woman. Women hold positions of power at literally every level of society. What agency is left for them to "have" that they do not already?
Hi Jason, scarcity principle applies here which is a proxy for ownership, for example the most dangerous time for a woman in a relationship, lets use your parlance, with an ‘evil’ man, is when she’s leaving him. Ponder on what subconscious bias he has going on in his mind for a moment. Now no one indeed raised him to murder anyone however a broader societal message, over spans of time, suggest women are the weaker sex for example, and more messaging (witches, gold diggers etc) that negates the fact that in today’s world women can be educated and provide for themselves, do kick boxing etc. Agency means a person is able to make decisions about themselves and their life without interference. There’s no contradiction. So it’s really about societal thresholds of behaviours that are accepted, despite the public declarations to the opposite. Eg. A sign says a U Turn cannot be done at an intersection but over time one person does it, others see and more and more drivers repeat the behaviour. If you do a poll, Molly he majority of those drivers strongly agree road signs must be obeyed, and yet they feel permission from the crowd to disobey it. It’s a clumsy analogy but hope it gives you something to ponder about the broader permissions, not explicitly expressed.
Rachel, it doesn't. You will have to state your argument more clearly. Are you arguing, like the article, that men need to step up and start protecting women better or are you arguing that men need do nothing to protect women except stop thinking it's OK to murder them?
I reject your argument that women are being murdered because men see other men do it and think it's OK. Whether conscious or unconscious, it's not a normal thought that men have that it's somehow OK to murder women. Women should stop being involved with men who think this way. Ideally, they would never start dating such a man. Evil should be recognized and cut from the dating pool.
My argument is that perhaps we should return to teaching people that women are the "weaker" sex and men have a responsibility to protect them. What's wrong with this idea? Mia is arguing that women are being dominated by men (because they are "stronger") and she calls on other men to defend women. Men won't do this if we, as a society, continue to tell them women have no need to be protected.
What is wrong with saying that women are intelligent, capable humans who can achieve anything they set their mind too, but they are also physically incapable of defending themselves in some situations? I promise you there are plenty of men willing to treat women like God's gift (which they are) while also being willing to give their own lives to protect them.
I agree men should stay out of women's bathrooms. They also should not masquerade as girls in order to bully them in sports or any other endeavor. There are millions upon millions of men who agree. Perhaps we should stop supporting the politicians and psychopaths who think these things are OK.
Touché Jason. I don’t need to explain it more clearly for you, you need critical thinking. I’m going shopping now because I’m a woman. And should anyone attempt to interfere with my agency while I’m out I know I can take care of myself and don’t need some dude stepping in thinking he’s a superhero who needs my gratitude. God bless.
I.e. It’s nice that you feel safe enough to express such a spunky posture, but It is clear you fundamentally don’t understand the nature of the world you live in. You appear to see individual data points and highlight their significance without having yet pieced them into a coherent whole. I’m afraid the worldview you hold and espouse would be catastrophic if it were not kept in check by others who are better acquaintanced with the underlying reality you have yet to appreciate.
I think woman-murderers should be ashamed of themselves. They make a bad name for regular murderers who just want to mind their own business and murder men.
Then I ask again, what would you have us do? What are you asking for? It's not enough to say we should "break the collective apathy." I don't know any men who are apathetic that women get killed. Even if they were, breaking the apathy would only make them care. It wouldn't stop anything. So, what is it that you are asking us to do to make you feel safe?
Dude. It's not women's jobs to tell us how to be good men! You're giving a great example of the thing you're complaining about, passive-aggressive male BS.
I never said it was. I asked what exactly they wanted us to do. There's a difference. The response "just go be good men" is childish and ridiculous. Good men are already good men. Good men already oppose bad men. Good men are raising their sons to be good men.
You want good men to simply go tell bad men to "do better?" What kind of asinine solution is that?
It's not their job to figure out for you how to be a good man. That was your mommy's job, and that's done now. Figure it out for yourself. That's what a real man does. He doesn't demand a to-do list.
The conversation was a cry for men to help protect women. I feel like we are part of that conversation. I'm not the problem. If you think that violent men will respond to other men but not women you're living in a fantasy world.
Males only listen to other males because males innately do not respect women.
If that weren't the case, none of this would be happening in the first place.
Go talk to other males. Leave women alone. You are the problem because males by their nature do not have the ability to engage in self-criticism and reality.
When I read this, my first reaction was to agree and applaud the writer for calling out the centuries old violence against women but then I pause and have to accept that, like Jason points out, the world is and always has been a violent place and since the beginning of time weaker individuals will be hurt and killed by stronger or more sinister ones, there’s really nothing we can do to change the nature of the beast, however as a woman, a mother and now grandmother of females I know the message my son is reaching his daughter is to resist the influences of the feminist society and to never go through the world as-if you’re just as safe as a man. There was a time where a women not only wouldn’t go out running ever, she wouldn’t show flesh as it was believed to be indecent, an enticement to male urges. How do we in 2024 believe that’s changed? Sure we can be as vulgar as say, Miley Cyrus on stage and claim she “free and expressive” but that’s complete bullshit. Feminists (mind you none of which of those elites would ever do any of the things they tout as ‘free’ themselves) for decades have drilled into women that unless you act and behave like a man you’re weak and hopeless and should be ashamed of wanting any man to help or protect you so…. Here we are now where women of any age at any time are prey for violence and now you want protection? Now after as Jason points out, you've completely castrated an entire generation of men you want them to run to your aid? My advise writer is to think long and hard about where you are as a young women in this world and do everything you can to help the rest of us undone the shitstorm mess the Feminists left for us to clean up and concentrate on how you can be a part of the movement to undo all the damage that’s been done. Oh, and definitely don’t go for a f**king run at night.
I feel that the message that needs to be repeated constantly is respect.
It is not about anti-bullying, or respect for women, but respect for everyone - people are entitled to their respectful opinions and should be free to state them without fear of violence or put-downs. If we are all taught from infancy to respect others, to abhor violence, perhaps women would not need to fear.
I agree. I wish that others here did as well. There's a great irony in what you've said and how some people have treated me on this particular issue here.
I might disagree on one small aspect. The author wanted to know why men today won't protect women. While I agree we should abhor senseless violence, I think we need, and should teach our boys, to be willing to physically act to protect others. This may require violence in some situations. Part of my original point, perhaps lost in the vitriol, is that in the effort to reduce violence we have stripped our young men of the very traits needed to help protect others.
I wholeheartedly reject the idea, shared on these comments) that ALL men are inherently violent animals and women will never be safe around us. This argument has no basis in history or logic. It's not silencing women or ignoring their concerns to put this out.
BY MEN, HO! Men will always be violent. Identity politics morons like you will never do a thing to mitigate the problem. The only thing that can be done is to build a better society with better economic outcomes across the board but we're going the opposite direction with essentialists like you playing handmaiden to capital as they strip society for parts. Enjoy your rainbow feminist capitalism and the increased violence that comes part and parcel with it.
You are full of advice for everyone except men, about which your only comment is a shrug, “men are violent”.
That’s a BS copout. Men are as violent as we raise them to be. It’s up to us to focus more on the violence problem in how we raise boys, if we want to lessen the violence problem in men.
Men are as violent as men have always been lol. It's opportunity, prosperity and family that decides how often their violence sees the light of day and it doesn't help that one of two political parties has made worshiping a permanent lumpenproletariat they've created a major part of their identity.
This may come as a shock to you, but reacting to male violence as if you were Beavis & Butthead doesn't inspire anyone to take anything else you say seriously, except other Beavises and Buttheads.
Thank you Mia for expressing how we are all feeling- angry, overwhelmed and exhausted. I want my daughter to be safe. This must be seen as a men’s issue.
As a woman who was viciously mugged by multiple men whilst checking my letterbox at my apartment block when I was in my 20s, I applaud you for giving this topic airtime. The police told me that every woman who goes through something as brutal as I did will learn to be more alert and conscious of her surroundings. She will cross the road when she feels unsafe, or enter a business or call someone. Through my life I’ve met and asked men (he/him) if they’ve ever been given this advice or had this feeling and I have only ever come up with blanks.. unless they are gay or identify as “they”. Yes there is evil in the world but men don’t seem to have to walk through the world on high alert anticipating it, the way that women do!
“In 2022, the FBI reported that there were 14,441 victims of murder who identified as male, compared to 4,251 victims of murder who identified as female in the United States.”
“According to the data given by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, worldwide, 79% of homicide victims are men, and in 193 of the 202 listed countries or regions, men were more likely to be killed than women.”
I suspect everyone who gets murdered is tired of getting murdered.
Understood. I think all of those points are important to recognize. Men as a broad category are more violent, more prone to aggression, and more capable of acting on those tendencies with lethal force than are women. And men would do well to understand the sense of comparative fear and vulnerability many women feel in this context.
If the aim is simply to decry the broad category of men though, I think that starts to become an exemplification of bigotry. Most men do not fall into the category of “men who murder or abuse women.” For most men, those who do so are contemptible.
But it's not just about a lack of understanding among individual men. It's about a persistent historical and global lack of understanding on a systemic level that perpetuates the violence women face at the hands of men. Those systems, too, are overwhelmingly dominated by men. So in a sense, yes, this is a problem perpetuated by men.
Gender can, believe it or not, be the best predictor of a certain outcome. For women, their gender best predicts their likelihood of being killed by an intimate partner. So it is a gender-based problem.
And for men, their gender predicts being killed under virtually every other circumstance. It’s not a pretty picture in either case.
I’m not sure I agree with you about the systemic problem you’ve described. I could make the same case decrying the apparent permission of the patriarchy for men to be killed in numbers that dwarf those of women. Overwhelmingly men seek to protect women and ensure their safety. We would not likely be having this discussion at all were that not so.
The point is that women don't kill men. Men kill women. And men kill men. Therefore men have a problem with killing. It's not rocket science.
When it comes to intimate partner violence, I suggest you learn exactly why women are so vulnerable to it. There are any number of lengthy historical studies to detail the myriad reasons why it has always been difficult for women to leave violent men, whether due to financial control, coercive control, legal barriers, a desire to protect children subject to violence, inaction from police, a lack of legal protection, lack of shelter, and so on. We can even identify the time at which a woman is most likely to be killed by her intimate partner (when she actually leaves him). This is a global phenomenon not limited to a single country. Maybe spend less time trying to defend homicidal men and more time trying to learn about the issues women and children face at the hands of men.
I see you thought bringing data in would help your argument. But you seem to be saying that in order to achieve parity more women need to be murdered, and I cannot condone this! Shun.
Kat, you may be noticing a general trend of pushback in this conversation, especially from men, against the idea that it is “men” in general as a category who are responsible for the fear engendered amongst women by the violence perpetrated by a very small contingent of men. The lax articulation of the issue results in a calumny against men who bear no more affiliation with the actions of those perpetrators than you do except by virtue of an accident of demography. We oppose and revile those men. We also have a bone to pick at being lumped in with murderers.
You and many others here seem oddly comfortable with this slander, which of course good men are going to find objectionable. We know it is generally men who are the perpetrators of violence as well as the victims. We are aware there is a heightened proclivity towards aggression that is often expressed in male nature. Quite frankly we live with that and have to grapple with it and channel it in ways you may not. Most men do so in commendable fashion, but certainly those who do not often cause terrible individual and societal harm, and the problem of poorly socialized men is a perennial one. It’s a struggle everyone has a shared interest in recognizing and understanding with dead-eyed clarity.
Sharpen up the articulation and sharpen up the understanding of the problem, ditch the broadband hate, and you won’t end up alienating the people whose support you most need to marshal towards improving the status quo.
Or don’t. Despite the grave subject matter and tragic fact of so many seeming so fearful, the broad primal screes against men are painfully funny to a lot of us in a way. It’s like watching a child screech at the mall. You wouldn’t get the eye-rolls if you were better at using your words.
I’m sorry, do you agree that all Muslims are terrorists and that all immigrants should be deported because they are killers? If so, kudos for your consistency. If not, why alert us to your incoherent ways of reasoning?
Countries all around the world have to pass laws to prevent adult men from marrying children.
Men are the problem. I don't care that not EVERY SINGLE man kills a woman. The fact that the bar for male behavior is literally in hell proves my point. They can't even stay out of girls' bathrooms.
Are you under the impression there are no female pedophiles? How many people think it's "romantic" when a teacher targets a middle school boy for "special attention." The double standards are gross.
Stop killing women and girls now! I hope that helps. I said it to a guy in line at the grocery store too. He said he’d think about it but he looked sketchy.
I refuse to live my life in fear. It’s a choice. You don’t have live in fear. A healthy fear is ok. For making better choices.
There is always danger. That’s just part of life. And as far a danger to women. We could be in a lot worse places around the world. I can’t help but feel gratitude for being born and raised here..
I would love this piece to be published where more men could read it. I could hear your voice rising in this piece Mia, and I was with you at every step xx
If only you had a life outside trolling. The smell drifting out from under your rock is quite unpleasant, time for you to return and close the rock down after you.
What if I really was a troll and you were calling me a troll as an insult and saying all these mean things about trolls to try to hurt my feelings ? Don’t you think it would be hurtful to trolls? Do you even think about the things you say before you say them? We have feelings too, you know. Look deeper before you lash out like that next time. Just cruel.
Very well written, It’s like you read my mind… Poor Samantha murdered running in daylight near home. No where seems safe anymore if you are a woman. City/country or day/night 💔
From the moment girls are old enough to go out without parents we are taught to be vigilant. We carry this vigilance with us throughout our lives, through all ages and stages. And we accept it as ‘normal’, it is ingrained in us. Oh to live in a world where we feel no trepidation, no threat, require no vigilance! Thanks Mia for voicing our fear, our anger and our demands! Now, if only ‘they’ would listen and act.
So much to unpack here. One of which is the clear implication that anything less than the eradication of murder from society wouldn't prevent a sufficiently impassioned person from writing an essay like this.
And from one perspective, you can think: "Well, why not? Why shouldn't we strive to end all suffering, starting with a commitment to engineer murder of out of society?"
But if we're being realistic, if we're accepting that, as much as we loathe it, as much as we wish it weren't true, murder will be with us, then how sober would this article's point of view be in a world where murder is committed with less frequency than it already is?
Because even in a world where murder is more exceedingly rare, you could still write this exact same article. You could list all the names of those lives wrongly taken away, you could call people to action, and yet -- wouldn't something seem off?
Wouldn't we be asking for a modicum of perspective and context amidst the outrage that implores us to see danger at every turn, no matter how irrational that idea?
An Australian Institute of Criminology report from 1999 stated that 125 women are murdered each year in Australia. The Guardian, in a report from this March, put the number at 64 for 2023.
And in a recent AIHW report, it states:
"The domestic homicide victimisation rate decreased from 0.8 to 0.3 per 100,000 people from 1989–90 to 2020–21 in the NHMP (the AIC's National Homicide Monitoring Program):
- The female victimisation rate decreased from 0.9 to 0.3 per 100,000 females.
- The male victimisation rate decreased from 0.6 to 0.3 per 100,000 males."
Every innocent life is precious. But in light of these figures, how rational, how much perspective can this article lay claim to?
How helpful is the catastrophizing tone -- a topic that NYU professor and social psychologist Jonathan Haidt has written about extensively?
In his book, "The Coddling of the American Mind," Haidt and coauthor Greg Lukianoff warn against cognitive distortions like catastrophizing, emotional reasoning, negative filtering and overgeneralizing.
All of which could arguably be said are hallmarks of this essay.
It employs repetitive rhetoric to elicit an emotional response and win over sympathy:
-- Eight instances of "we are murdered" in the first 16 lines.
-- A context-free assertion that "Men keep killing us."
-- Twelve variations of "We are tired" -- which perversely seems to prioritize the stress of having to even think about the dangers of the world above those whose lives were ended.
It reinforces its own sense of catastrophe, that danger lurks everywhere and is waiting for you at every turn.
It is, at its core, a complaint against existence itself. Why should I have to take precautions -- it exhausts me. It offends me to have to worry about my surroundings when I might be vulnerable in the rare case that someone wants to do me harm.
It talks about the emotional toll of hearing footsteps and wondering "Is this it?" And yet -- was that it? Or were they really just the footsteps of someone you're sharing the planet with?
I'm a man, and I can tell you it's nervewracking to be in the awful position of minding my own business, walking to my own car in a parking garage, or along a street at night, and suddenly finding that I'm behind a woman BECAUSE WE HAPPEN TO BE GOING IN THE SAME DIRECTION.
Ask your male friends how many of us wish we could be anywhere else. How many of us intentionally take another path or slow down to a snail's pace so the woman in front of us doesn't have this irrational feeling that we're about to harm her.
Ask your male friends who are runners if they feel invincible. I've been running in my neighborhood for 12 years. And always at night. I'm always concerned.
I know I'm in danger. But to run in daylight hours would be worse, because that's when I've been verbally attacked with a homosexual slur for simply running. When I've been confronted by a zealous neighbor for daring to exercise past her house without permission.
So I run at night, when there are fewer people on the road. Because being able to run while taking on some small amount of danger is a tradeoff I'm willing to make. I keep within my residential neighborhood, I leap to sidewalks when a car approaches, and that's about it. This isn't taxing, unjust labor. And if someone wants to shoot me or attack me with a knife, I'm probably not making it out. Being a man doesn't make me invulnerable.
You recognize the dangers and you do your best to mitigate them according to a risk calculus that works for you.
You get behind the wheel; you put on your seatbelt.
Hate is blinding, clearly. The point being made is one regarding the proportionality and proper allocation of the fear and outrage. Since no supply of data will sway you towards recognizing that men and women are both subject to violence, and in measures contrary to the thrust of the article, and you feel this is a problem solely for the men who have no part in such violence to solve, it seems you may be reveling in your need to spill your own venom more than you are proving a useful advocate for your own positions, much less a contributor to a productive conversation.
If the best you can offer is another throw away dismissal, I think that will be pretty glaringly evident to everyone. You really aren’t the arbiter of this discussion.
It is mind boggling how many women have been abused or murdered by men ( and not always by men known to them! ), in this country and around the world. This is the epitome of our inequality in just one major way. Never mind wages etc - how do we get some protection for women if even ordinary men won’t stand up for us??
I would like to formally lodge a complaint blaming all women for their complicity in the killing of young children. Please stop. Especially you women who have never killed any children. You are the biggest problem. Your denial that all women are the problem is the problem. Arguing that very few women kill children is also part of the problem. Arguing that there is something wrong with the very few women who kill children is also ALSO part of the problem.
How are we supposed to solve problems if we refuse to get confused about the problem? Please recognize that everyone who is not the problem are the problem!!
Stop voting for gun grabbers. Then: 1. You can readily buy a firearm and learn to use and carry it; 2. More armed women who refuse to be victims=fewer perps who will target you.
I don’t know. If the precision of thought on display in this comments section is any indication, there would be bullets flying angrily in every random direction and many innocent people would be killed.
Get a gun, train with it regularly, and carry it everywhere. Guns are the great equalizer. Guns in the hands of women are a practical, readily available solution for this problem. And if that is not legal in your area, it’s because libs have voted for female disarmament, and thus are clearly IN FAVOR of female victimization. GUN RIGHTS ARE WOMEN’S RIGHTS. If you’d rather complain about the existence of evil (which has been with us since the beginning and will never go away) than defend yourself against it, you are choosing to be a victim.
I will never take it from an American! Americans do bad things and you do NOTHING to stop them! GO TALK TO YOUR OTHER AMERICANS INSTEAD OF BOTHERING PEOPLE HERE! BYE! (Sorry I shouted.) But now, bye.
Do you your son, husband and father have to worry about getting attacked on a morning run as much as a woman does? Do they need to take as many precautions?
Are you a child? I’m really just curious. It feels that way reading your comments. They give the impression of a fairly undeveloped person with no ability to trade in nuance without resorting to insults.
But I like my comments. They were making the same points, just for those who were able to understand them. I’ve tried to spell it out for you since, but you’re still stuck in humorless autism mode.
Well clearly yes they have to take greater precautions if they have 100% greater chances of being murdered. But they tend not to take those precautions because it's never talked about and noone seems to care. When's the last article you read about it Vs how many have you read about women. Somehow we should be outraged about harm to women but men are disposable. Do you know the names of any of the men who were murdered last year or their circumstances? Why do they matter so little? Why isn't murder of any human being horrifying?
Why does only the threat during running in the morning specifically matter? Why is this the only circumstance that is worth discussing?, why are coward punches and domestic violence of men not an issue? Why is it ok to send young men to war? Or into dangerous jobs? I dot't get why 'the morning run' murder matters more than all the others. Men are at greater risk of assault just walking down the street than women. Maybe not in the morning run because they can run faster, but choosing this example is the definition of cherry-picking your argument to suit the narrative. Exactly how many women have been murdered on Thier morning run in Australia? And is it more or less than the number killed by sharks?
It's the subject of the article, and an excellent example of how women are more vulnerable than men are even when they do everything right, and as a result reasonably suffer more from fear and all of the problems that come from it. There is nothing more they can reasonably be expected to do, so if it's going to get better they need help from society at large. THAT'S WHY THEY'RE TELLING US.
If a man wants to be safer from being murdered, he knows, or should know, that avoiding doing dumb, reckless dangerous shit will help a lot in that regard. But clearly, men are as a whole choosing to place themselves in personal situations of greater risk of being murdered, even aside from their job choices. It's a lot harder to feel sympathy for those men, and I'm not hearing them asking for it.
I'm sure that if you wrote an article about those other problems you mention, a lot of people would sympathize with you. But in this context, it just looks like hand-waving.
Let's just give women a mid-day work hiatus so they can take their run then so we can focus on actual murder outcomes instead you silly white knight. Sound good?
That's the perception, but it's not true. When it comes to murder, women are safer in public than men. The situation is reversed in the home, on average.
It is true. If you want to compare safety, you have to compare similar situations.
Men do a lot more reckless, stupid, aggressive, dangerous sh*t than women do. That's why they get murdered more.
Women get murdered even when they do everything they can reasonably be expected to do to keep themselves safe. That's part of why it's worse for them. They understandably feel HELPLESS and ANGRY, in addition to feeling unsafe.
Do men feel helpless? No. They know that even if they get themselves into a dangerous situation, they have a reasonable chance of getting themselves out of it.
Some every murdered man has it coming because he was reckless and stupid? I believe that we have heard this song before. It's called "victim blaming." It's a bad look no matter what sex is being targeted.
Your response to 2/3 of murders in this major western country are men = "but they probably don't think twice to take a morning run"?! You are truly regarded.
What percentage of men would you say murder women? It has to be most men, I would guess. And the ones who don’t are probably just too lazy. They just stand around and don’t do anything. Ugh.
I know it starts with "The." Then there's some other words after that. I think one of them is fox. The silver moon fox the brown something. Or maybe it was two fox. The silver moon gave two fox about thinking clearly...?
I mean this with respect, but... What do you want us (men) to do?
There is evil in the world. It's not a man or a woman thing. It is a good vs evil thing. It is a spiritual thing. It is a repent and call on God thing.
There are things we (men) can do to help...if we're allowed. All too often in this world men are condemned for being men.
We've destroyed the ability for our boys to grow up and become protectors be demonizing all of the male traits that lead to boys becoming men who are protectors.
We took away recess and P.E. and told boys to quite roughhousing.
We told boys to treat girls equally and not open doors for them or give up seats for them.
We implemented zero tolerance policies in schools that equally punish bullies and those who stand up to them.
We put dresses on them and tell them it's acceptable to dominate girls in women's sports.
We gave them access to unlimited porn and wonder why they don't resect women.
We portray men in popular culture as feckless, hopeless, weak, and stupid.
We celebrate effiminate men while denigrating manly men.
We've spent decades preaching that no woman needs a man.
We've eliminated any distinction between the sexes to the point where being a man or a woman is largely a matter of whim decided by how one feels rather than how one is born.
We've demonized and denigrated and reduced the value of being a man so much that most men have no idea how to act like one.
In short, we've done this to ourselves. Women have contributed to this. Mothers no longer teach their sons to stand up for the weak and vulnerable because we refuse to admit that anyone is weak and vulnerable. Fathers have contributed by abandoning their families and failing to show their sons what it means to be a real man.
We've virtue signaled our sons out of manhood and now we wonder why they don't act like men.
What do they want us to do??
For starters, they want us to take the problem more seriously.
When we say dumb shit like "It's not a man or a woman thing.", we're not taking it seriously.
When among the first things out of our mouth in response is defensive numbnuttery like "men are condemned for being men", we're not taking it seriously.
Women demonize male violence (like in this article - see?).
Women don't demonize men for not being violent.
We need to pay more attention, time, effort and resources to the problem of violence, and catching it early rather than laughing it off.
For Christ's sake let's stop complaining about not getting enough cookies for not being a homicidal maniac.
GROW UP. Be a man.
Who doesn't whine, who holds other men accountable when they lack self-control.
Who takes pride in his own mature temperament and wisdom as much as he does in his strength.
Who doesn't blame women for his own weakness.
Who doesn't take his advantages for granted.
Who celebrates and rejoices in female sensibleness, wisdom, clear and caring vision, and just laughs affectionately at the women when they are their ridiculously mean and petty and crazy selves, rather than screaming at them.
We men are at the top of the freakin' world. The women fall all over themselves to defer to us and please us and bid for our attention, whether we earn it or not.
Let's appreciate our manhood, and the servant-leader role we get to play.
Read my original comment again. I did not dismiss the issue. The author was bemoaning why men won't stand up for women. I pointed out some of the reasons. Do some men commit violence against women? Yes. Do most men oppose it? Yes.
But I would argue that the reason some men do not do more is because of the way they are treated when they try to get involved. One need only read the comments directed towards me here to see an example. If you ask men to help then treat them badly when they get involved I'm not sure what you would expect to happen.
If we don't get fathers involved in raising their sons, and we don't start teaching our boys how to be responsible, Godly men, and we don't stop telling them to go away when they try to get involved we will never raise another generation that exults and protects women. Radical feminism and male blaming will not solve the problem.
You must have been reading a different article. Also, I don't know whom you are including in "godly men", but violence against women is not limited to the non-religious.
That your response to a woman's murder is essentially that liberal politics has ruined men's ability to be responsible for their own actions is telling. And your continuing to push your original point in every subsequent comment is indeed dismissing the issue.
This wasn’t just an article about a woman’s murder. The author and many of the commenters here have taken a wanton scattershot approach to venting their frustration and anger and have provided sloppy and emotional reasoning for doing so.
If you feel justified in drawing non-perpetrators into an emotional scree, at least be prepared to be addressed by the innocent and otherwise sympathetic targets of your wrath.
Many women here seem to have become accustomed to men adopting an avoidant strategy to avoid a confrontation with an irrational geyser of emotion and cannot handle being called to account for the vicious unreason they direct at others.
This comment has been brought to you by the same people who think all immigrants should be deported because of one murder, all Muslims are terrorists and all black men are thugs.
In other words, we're applying their own standards to the crime white men commit and it's just so unfair.
Next Spilling will once again claim that we're all overreacting because he knows as a white man that that's what women do.
🙄
You know, Spilling, you should have your home town declared a nature preserve. Because I didn't know your kind existed in the wild anymore.
I watch Sesame Street almost every Sunday morning when my mom will let me, and they said that's not good to make people into groups with other people who are different just because they seem the same. They said that was bad.
This message was brought to you by the letter "S."
S is for circle. And other words that I can't think of right now.
So you’re adopting that same indiscriminate vilification here as a rhetorical device? Because you think I’m a white male?
Overall the point is that if you wish to impact the incidence of anti-social violence, the policies that either constrain or embolden the people most apt to perpetuate that violence are important to countenance with some clear-eyed critical evaluation.
All of society has an investment in the outcome, and policies which produce more disaffected and poorly socialized young men will lead to more crime, more suffering, and I guess more crying and screaming and whining to the well-behaved men who keep trying to steer you towards a better set of solutions.
You're adorable.
It’s the face tattoo. I had one done of my face and it looks just like me.
Wrong. Read the article again. The author was bemoaning the fact that women are in danger from male violence all the time, and men aren't getting how big of a problem it is. Not "why men won't stand up for women", whatever that means.
To respond to such an article with any amount of complaining about how hard things are for men in other ways, is trying to change the subject, which is itself an example of the problem the article is pointing out.
The ways in which men have to do more are mainly about holding other men more accountable, and devoting more time, energy and resources toward that.
What you are calling" the way they are treated when they try to get involved" has nothing to do with that.
The way you are being treated in these comments has nothing to do with that. You're being treated badly because you're saying stupid things, not because you're a man.
You are playing a childish game of tit-for-tat, when the topic is a serious, adult one of female vulnerability to and fear of violence from men, which is something that men do not experience nearly to the same degree as women do.
Men need to make more of an effort to understand the harm that such fear and lack of safety causes for women.
And that needs to happen regardless of whether men get the visitation/custody schedule they want when they divorce.
One more time - you're using an article about women's feelings about MALE VIOLENCE TOWARD WOMEN, to vent your unrelated frustrations with women, and how society treats men.
Stopping boys from picking on each other isn't going to help with male violence.
More popular culture portrayals of male heroes as hyper-angry, hyper-macho, hyper-violent, emotionally disconnected, robotic revenge machines isn't going to help with male violence. If anything it makes it worse.
More popular culture portrayals of women as hopelessly dependent on men will only feed male egos with unrealistic expectations.
Nearly all the things that you think more of would make things better, have been making things worse for years.
I do agree with you about recess though 😂
It's fine if you don't want to actually talk about the problem. Lots of people here agree with what I said. I think many people reading this will have a more open mind to the thoughts I was trying to convey and will clearly see who is being unreasonable.
But I refuse to blame ALL men for the violence of some. To do so is unreasonable and irrational. The problem will never be solved without the help of men so continuing to angrily denigrate them solves nothing and leads nowhere. God bless!
Dude you can’t even come up with a direct response to anything I actually said. That is very telling.
“I don’t care about male violence unless you are nice to me” is a childish, irresponsible response.
You are adding nothing of value to the conversation or debate. Grow up and learn to be a responsible citizen.
Hazelnuts! You’re still being a prick.
Jason, if most men opposed it, rape kits would be tested immediately instead waiting for crowd funding.
I'm with you on the rape kit thing. I think most men are - most men who aren't politicians. I say we take the money we're sending to foreign countries that mean nothing to us and use that to fund rape kit testing. Heck, let's throw in DNA testing for other things too. Basically, if we have DNA let's test it.
Here's a thought, what if we shut down all the illegal biolabs the CIA seems to have set up everywhere and use that money to fund DNA testing labs?
I can’t believe they sell rape kits?!!
I'm sorry your mom skipped health class when she homeschooled you.
Seriously, some woman probably thinks you're an okay human being. I don't care what you say to me because well, because I've read your BS but don't repeat that to a woman who might think better of you.
It just seems like that would encourage rape. I don’t want to encourage rape.
You’re right, Jason. We need to encourage righteous masculinity.
This sounds like victim blaming, women aren't asking the right men to stand up for them? One of the presidential candidates has been convicted of sexual assault/rape and denigrates women on a daily basis in the news and is rewarded for that behavior. That's the example set. Violence against women is institutional and widely accepted, so until the ERA is ratified there is nothing the institutions can do to change themselves without the political will of every man who is in a position of power. Scroll back from all the nonsense you're using as a shield against the charge and look at the basic reality of women's lives in the US. Your wife and daughters are not full citizens. Think about that. And then read Backlash by Susan Faludi and you might have the thinnest grasp about what's really happening. Asking the good hard questions about why violence against women continues to escalate is not assaulting you personally. It's not about you, it's about them.
Stop talking and listen to what women are saying.
We started talking after listening to what some of the women were saying and noticing it wasn’t all that reasonable.
Actually, the more listening I’ve done, the less I find myself wanting to listen in the future.
I am. I have. Some of them don't seem to be listening to anyone though.
"For starters, they want us to take the problem more seriously."
If you want to take the problem seriously you might like to start with not objectifying women as passive, inert, objects with no agency. Men are by far the greatest victims of violence and always have been, but violence against women is a far greater crime for this simple reason: society values women more than men.
Women value women more than men, and men also value women more than men. Gynocentrism (and chivalry) is hard wired into the human species. When Boko Harem kidnapped a bunch of schoolgirls this caused international outrage - and the story was framed as evidence of just how much the world hates and abuses women. Nobody EVEN THOUGHT to ask what happened to the boys and if they were alright. That is how much of an empathy gap we have. The boys were all murdered in cold blood in the classroom.
If that threatens your identity as a man you need to deal with it. At least acknowledge it. Thanks to biology/ hormones etc women tend to over estimate their vulnerability and victimhood, and men tend to over estimate their invulnerability and privilege. Women are neurotic and risk adverse, and men are careless risk takers. If we can’t accept basic biological truths and have EMPATHY for how each sex sees (and feels) the world and their place in it then there is no point in even trying to address a topic like this.
Feeding women's natural neuroticism (a trait perfectly suited to the role of mother BTW) for your own personal gain (white knighting) is really a kind of 'soft terrorism'. Governments and the UN are full of pointless men who's high salaried career is justified by telling women just how vulnerable they are and how dangerous men are. It's just exploiting biological hard wiring.
“Women demonize male violence “
No. Women demonise, glorify, celebrate and demand male violence in equal measure. In high crime neighbourhoods studies show women select the most violent men with a criminal record and jail time as partners. Women have always adored (and sexualised) soldiers and police, who are men specifically trained to be violent (and to be killers). Women want male violence to be in service to women and children. See also: the rest of the natural world. Men and women are two halves of the same organism. Men are the protective outer shell. Part of the protection men provide is their capacity to be violent when necessary.
Obviously, men’s capacity for violence requires careful handling, just as women’s sexual power and fertility does too. Traditionally, fathers taught their sons how to be 'real men' (literally GENTLE men), which meant learning restraint. But feminism kicked men out of the home, demonised traditional masculinity (to be replaced by chads and metrosexuals) and encouraged - and financially incentivised - single mother households, which has given us several generations of men unable to handle their masculinity with any restraint (as well as generations of women unable to handle their femininity with restraint too). Studies show that fathers instil restraint in boys AND girls. But we got rid of fathers in the name of 'saving women' from 'the patriarchy'. As a result we got gang culture and its equally toxic counterpart: 'white knighting' men. Neither make life safer or better for women and children (or for men for that matter).
"We men are at the top of the freakin' world."
Men score LOWER than women by every conceivable metric (homelessness, access to healthcare, conviction/ sentencing inequality, access to shelters, reproductive autonomy, life expectancy, access to socialised services, the draft, access to children, divorce law etc).
Men also receive much less EMPATHY/ SYMPATHY which is why you (as a man) must work much harder than women to get social approval (and be considered a 'real man'). You do this by throwing your fellow men under the bus and then acting as society’s one good chivalrous man, in a sea of horrid misogynistic men. Women band together and play the victim., while men throw each other under the bus and play the lone hero on to of the pile. We can't really avoid this hard wiring, but to not be aware of it (and to indulge in it) means we will never be able to even understand gender relations, much less improve anything.
The other commenter was right. The science and the studies are clear: if you want to create a society with less violence/ crime/ gang culture/ promiscuity/ underage pregnancy you just need to repair the broken home, and specifically get fathers back into the home. The only way to do that is to undo decades of feminist propaganda and feminist changes to the legal system.
But to do THAT means having to give up the idea men are/ were to blame for all social ills, and having to accept that you - as a man - are NOT fully responsible for the state of society. Women are AT LEAST 50% responsible. This means having to give up the idea that men have all the power, and having to hand half of that power BACK to women (together with the sense of SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY that goes with it). Acknowledging women's power (women's agency) threatens the identity of most modern (post feminist) men to the core.
“The women fall all over themselves to defer to us and please us and bid for our attention, whether we earn it or not.”
This is part of the feminist Male Power Fantasy. The hard reality is that our society would never tolerate a ‘she for he' campaign, much less fund one and cheer for it at the UN. The idea that women have ANY responsibility to serve men in any way is regarded as pure sexism and misogyny. "Kill all women" would never become a popular and celebrated hashtag like "Kill all men" was. We'd never accept a social obligation to raise children properly as stay at home mothers, the way we accept men's duty to keep the power stations running and the global transport and food distribution system operational. Is proper parenting any less important that electric lighting and internationally shipped foods? Apparently it is much less important. We even financially incentivise out of wedlock pregnancy and broken homes, despite knowing the social breakdown and higher crime it causes - including the danger it puts women in. And we call it 'women's empowerment'.
You see, the idea that women have any role to play in improving society is now a taboo concept. Women are, after all, just passive objects, right? Having agency is only for men, right?
Women's only role now is to play the eternal victim and make ever more hysterical appeals to feminist men to solve society's problems by throwing even more men under the bus. Yeah, that will solve it! :)
Oh look, another man responding to concerns about women getting *murdered* by crying about men *not being worshipped enough*.
FFS dude you are an embarrassment to the sex.
Who taught you that whining was manly? I'd really like to know.
Who taught you that men needn't be overly concerned about other men being violent towards women? That the appropriate response was a shrug?
You've had some shitty models for male behavior.
Manhood comes with terrific advantages and privileges, but we need to live up to the responsibilities that come with them.
One of those is stepping up and taking the lead in matters of protection from physical violence.
So buck up and take more seriously your job of holding other men accountable for exercising self-control, especially young men.
1. Raising children properly (ie not abusing them/ neglecting them) is not 'worshipping men'.
2. "Who taught you that whining was manly?" - You have just implied that whining is uniquely feminine behaviour, and/ or a privilege reserved exclusively for women.
3. "Manhood comes with terrific advantages and privileges" - As I already pointed out men score LOWER than women by every possible metric of 'privilege'.
You used the word 'manhood', rather than male. It's worth pointing out that manhood (unlike womanhood) is a status which men have to earn by showing positive male qualities (courage, responsibility, honesty, diligence, restraint and a willingness to protect and provide for the women in his life). The reason why feminists often think men are 'privileged' is because they are focusing on those specific men who have worked hard to earn their 'manhood' status. By contrast, women earn the status of womanhood simply by becoming fertile and capable of bearing children.
The reason why so many post feminist women are full of angst, envy and low self esteem is that they have been trained by feminist ideology to aspire to manhood, but without actually taking the steps that men take to achieve that social status. Instead they continue to enhance their femininity, but with little interest in traditional pair bonding and motherhood they just und up becoming professional victims (damsels) who spit on men, while simultaneously appealing to men to be rescued ("he for she").
4. "One of those is stepping up and taking the lead in matters of protection from physical violence." - Demanding male protection when in public is nothing new. It's called chaperones, chivalry and traditional gender roles and social ettiquette. Feminism demanded we do away with all of that. Society complied. Then feminists demanded we do away with the concept of stay-at-home motherhood and fathers in the home, BOTH of which are necessary to raise children properly, and prevent them from growing up to become monsters. Again, society complied to feminists' demands.
And now here we are.
What you are essentially doing is trying to slow down the 18 wheeler by applying more pressure to the gas pedal. And when someone like me gets on the radio and suggests maybe taking the foot off the gas and applying it to the break pedal instead, you just fly off the handle and punch the radio.
1. You are hand-waving. Women getting murdered by men despite taking all reasonable precautions and male violence in general is the issue, not your feelings. Get over yourself.
2. Here you are, still whining, instead of stepping up and being a man who accepts his responsibilities.
3. Yep. Still whining, and pretending that as men we don't have things really, really good in our society. Embarrassing.
4. No, feminism didn't demand any of that. Feminism demanded equal respect for women. Period.
You and your fellow immature men made up the rest, in a childish tantrum-response to feminism that amounts to "Oh yeah?! Well if I'm not allowed to occasionally abuse my privilege of physical superiority over women, then I don't have to use it to help physically protect them either!"
It's like if women responded to admonishments not to smoke and drink to excess during pregnancy by saying "Fine! YOU bear the children then!"
Just childish.
Man up, little boy.
The biggest determining factor for male violence (and female violence) is abuse, neglect and lack of male influence (ie present father) during childhood.
So there's your solution. If you want to make society safer, you just need to promote responsible mate selection by women, no children outside of marriage, a strong stable family home and a society which allows fathers to support a family so that the mother is free to raise her children properly.
If you want to make society even more safe for women after that, you need to promote a return of chivalry, chaperones and traditional gender roles and social conventions.
These are the things you are demanding, even if you don't yet realise it...... or don't want to admit it.
Countless social studies with actors and hidden cameras have shown that men will pounce on any man who appears to be harassing or attacking a woman in public, but they will do nothing when a woman is harassing or attacking a man in public.
Women display the same reaction, except they are more likely to smirk, cheer, clap and even encourage a woman who appears to be harassing or attacking a man in public.
So we know the problem is not men. Men are chivalrous and gynocentric by nature. It's hard wired into men to be that way.
The men you are complaining about are BROKEN men, and we already know what breaks men - broken homes, abusive and neglected childhoods, lack of fathers etc. So that's what we need to fix :)
Yes! And his inevitable comebacks will be disposable.
The men who rape, abuse, and murder are "real" men. What do you think they are? Ghosts? Apparitions?
Men have been doing this for thousands of years. It's only now that women can actually say something about it. Don't fucking act like this is the result of modern FeMiNiSmS making you feel bad about male violence.
You did exactly what the problem is--act like males like you have nothing to do with it because "it's not a man or woman thing."
IT IS A MAN THING. Male violence is the problem. You won't even fucking admit that it exists! That is the problem right there. From India to the Congo to the US to Italy.
Thanks for proving that males are the issue. And you're too fucking dumb to see it. That attitude, this right here, is the reason it's a problem in the first place, and it's innate.
What do women want? STOP FUCKING CAUSING THE PROBLEM. Go talk to men, not leave comments acting like nothing is even happening.
Idiot.
The author of the article wants men to protect women. How? By simply not attacking women?
What is the cause of male violence? Put it into words. You cannot stop that which you cannot describe. Are you saying it's an inate male trait to inflict violence on women? That's absurd.
You want us men to go "talk to men" and say what? Don't be violent to women? Are you actually being serious? There are millions of men who have never been violent towards women, will never be violent towards women, and do not think violence towards women is acceptable. But you put us all in the same bucket, blaming all men for the actions of the few then wonder why men aren't springing to your defense?
I ask what you would have us do and you insult me and ridicule me and all other men instead of having a rational conversation about what an acceptable solution might be.
Whatever the solution, I'd guess it would begin by treating men with the same respect you would have us treat women.
The idea that this problem as described is a universal male problem and not a societal problem is shallow and unserious.
Respect ! I think we’re way past talking about respect and fully into anger. Men just have no idea of the constant safety measures we have to take. You say not all men and I say, it’s always a man.
You said it. We’re way past talking sense and fully into anger.
The problem exists in society because of males.
Yes, that's what I want you to do. Stop crying and saying IT'S NOT ALL and tell men to stop acting so fucking stupid.
You're here hijacking and gaslighting when women point out a problem, if you can do this you can address the problem with males who are the actual cause. The fact that it doesn't occur to you to even do that, while this is fine as you deny it's even a male violence problem, proves my point. Thanks for making it so easy.
Yes, it is innate for males to be stupid and violent, and as a result even unable to recognize that they are the problem. It's universal, from China to Honduras to Afghanistan to Ukraine. That's because male stupidity and violence is universal, since it's innate.
GO AWAY.
If it is innate for males to be stupid and violent, the obvious solution is to simply incarcerate or exterminate all males. QED.
Of course that would exterminate the species. So... maybe find a different solution?
Thank you. Some of us would like to make these bastards die horribly. But...we see issues with doing so if we will be prosecuted like Daniel Penny or Kyle Rittenhouse for restoring order.
Reality is some groups commit crimes at an extremely different rate. Disparate impact would be very clear if we could truly protect. Almost sure this Kat also supports intersectional thinking too.
What male wants to lose everything protecting a random female today?
Maybe if women would support this by not convicting those who do what is truly right rather than what is legal when they sit on a jury?
Well heck, China was doing it to females on a pretty large scale for a while there.
And we already do it with livestock and sport stock, why not men?
Castrate most of them young, raise a few for breeding selection in confinement.
Have you seen how they extract semen from stallions and bulls? Mighty effective. Think suction, lots of it. And on the other end of the process, VERY large turkey-basters.
Less romantic perhaps, but no domestic violence!
Ever wonder what happens to male chicks at the hatchery? Right into the grinder.
Now with bees, the males just hang out and have sex with the queen.
Lots worth emulating in the animal kingdom....
Yes, China was doing it to females. They also exterminated the sparrow. Both are cautionary tales, not achievements to be emulated.
Only permitting a few males to breed means the next generation are mostly siblings. Inbreeding is sometimes desirable in livestock. Brothers and sisters are bred together all the time. It's a way to bring out any defective recessive genes by concentrating them. The defective animals are then culled, the few that didn't inherit the defective genes are then outbred. This selective breeding (and selective extermination) when applied to humans, is called eugenics. It's a guaranteed route to genocide and other crimes against humanity. We already played this game. It didn't end well.
You seem to be deeply discontented with human beings and wish to be a member of a non-human species. The transhumanists will welcome you
I'm firmly on team pro-human.
I'm starting to think you just hate men.
So, no, I'm not the problem here.
If you can hijack articles about male violence and deny it even exists, then you can do something else with your life. Go away. Talk to idiot males because they are the problem.
Go talk to these guys. This upcoming generation is turning out great, what with male role models like you out there.
Just go away. Leave women alone.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/new-jersey-teen-sues-classmate-for-allegedly-creating-sharing-fake-ai-nudes/
I never claimed male violence doesn't exist. Don't put words in my mouth. I asked what we should do about it. You are claiming nothing can be done because men are inherently violent then you told me to go away and go tell men to stop being violent.
I'm not really sure what you want except to get the last rude word in. Your arguments are incoherent and hateful.
Ding ding ding!!!Jason gets it.
Fully agree with you Jason. Just to reflect for a second, I hear a lot of anger in this piece and in this thread from women who really just want the reality of violence by men against women to be acknowledged, so I just want to say that I do hear that, and I do recognize the reality of that, and that that reality is truly awful and probably impossible to imagine, as a man, at least not fully. It's something I surely don't think about enough and the fact that I can even say that is a privilege.
I have to imagine that most men, many of whom have women in their lives who are important to them (myself included), and many of whom are just decent human beings, want nothing more than to see this reckoned with. I think then, as a man, it's painful to read something like this, first because of the tragedy of it, obviously, but second because when the proposed solution is to simply lay the problem at men's feet, it feels like we're missing an opportunity to really understand it. I don't say this to hijack the conversation and center it on men, but to think more deeply about the problem.
I don't know a lot about violence, but the root causes seem complex. Why are some men violent and not others? Childhood trauma, parenting experiences, our culture around masculinity, poverty and social status--all of these are surely involved. It's going to take a societal effort to work on these things. Yes, men will be at the center of that, but we'll need fathers, mothers, sisters, brothers, friends, cousins, aunts, uncles, grandparents, husbands, wives, teachers, and classmates to be involved too.
I totally understand the impulse to be angry or find blame here too. It's deeply unfair that women disproportionately bear the consequences of this. But blaming men is like blaming homelessness on houses. Yes, houses are directly involved, as are men in these cases, but these problems are deep and complex and hard. We all, unfortunately, have to reconckon with them.
And again, I fully hear and acknowledge the anger here. It's not fair, and this isn't something I spend enough time thinking about, so I appreciate the piece and the opportunity to do that.
Sit down dude, really
How? By simply not attacking women?
I mean, yeah. Got it in one, champ.
Considering a vast majority of men (nearly all, if we're being honest) have never and will never attack a woman I guess we're already protecting them...making this article and these conversations pointless.
If only the men who ARE attacking women would read this they'd probably just stop because we told them too. Problem solved, I guess.
His is the same kind of bullshit that racists pull on Black people. Well I don't see any slaves around me now and I don't have any slaves myself, so its all over then! It's all about meeeeee! You people of color need to explain to white what to do and tell us how to figure it all out, and feel bad for us too because it makes me uncomfortable! Ugh, sit down. Entitlement sucks and it's a big waste of time.
Agreed about the entitlement. It’s painfully invisible to many who hold it. To wit…
"The men who rape, abuse, and murder are "real" men. What do you think they are? Ghosts? Apparitions?"
In a sense yes. They are BROKEN men. Violent men are typically the victims of childhood abuse, neglect, torture, humiliation and the constant disapproval of a society which has already defined them as 'the problem' and shows them no empathy whatsoever. Sexually violent men tend to have suffered childhood abuse/ humiliation at the hands of a female, generally the mother.
Men who were NOT broken as children do not commit murder, rape or any other anti social acts.
Men are no different to dogs. Abuse them and neglect them as pups and you will end up with a dog that bites people or just gets up in their faces and barks.
We all understand what produces unruly and dangerous dogs. It's their OWNERS - the people who got a dog on a whim, or for vanity reasons, and then failed to make the PROPER COMMITMENT and SACRIFICES necessary to train it properly and care for it properly. We all understand this perfectly well. When a dog is unruly and dangerous we point the finger of blame at the person who raised it.
The exact same principle applies to people. But the problem is that this draws attention to women's RESPONSIBILITY with respect to (1) responsible mate selection (2) responsible reproduction (3) proper parenting.
Raising a dog AND raising children BOTH require huge sacrifices if you want them to not turn out unruly and violent. For children that means being a stay at home mother with a husband who can support the whole baby making enterprise. Children are MORE of a responsibility than dogs, but we live in a society where children are now regarded as a kind of fashion accessory. Well, there are consequences to that kind of mentality.
All of the social conventions we threw out in the name of 'empowering women' and 'smashing the patriarchy' were specifically designed to ensure a safe, stable, loving family home in which to raise normal, well adjusted children with a both mother and father present and active throughout childhood and ZERO interference from the state or minimum wage strangers (AKA daycare).
So either we have traditional families again with stay at home mothers and fathers present ....... OR we have to accept having gang culture, 'bro' culture, high crime, promiscuity, teenage pregnancy and a hyper-sexualised culture with no restraint.
Which society do you want?
I couldn’t agree more. Like it or not, we need each other. Mothers to be good kind strong mothers to their sons, fathers to be good strong kind men to their sons. Mothers to be good strong kind mothers to their daughters. Fathers to be good kind and strong for their daughters. And for all of us to collectively remember, men aren’t all evil. Women aren’t all weak.
No.
You're exactly wrong. Male violence is the problem. Acting like men aren't ALL evil because they haven't raped and murdered and should get a medal for that is the problem right there.
Stop gaslighting.
The only thing that has ever controlled male violence is strong protective men. Men control men.
It's a pattern that isn't even limited to our species. Older male cougars police the young dumb male cougars. A territory with an older male cougar has few cougar attacks on pets and children. Let a trophy hunter take out the policecat and a bunch of adolescent males move in. Feline gangbangers.
Back to humans. In an effort to make men less violent, the culture as a whole decided to make as many men as possible as weak as possible.
The result has been that the predators are just as predatory, but the protectors are gone, powerless, or demoralized.
1. People aren't animals, our expectations for men are higher than that.
2. You've seen too many movies and TV and video games with hyper-violent, hyper-macho, hyper-unrealistic male protagonists and now you think any man that isn't like that is lame.
3, The actual key is self-control. Teaching boys and young men not to fly off the handle and wreck things/other people when they're pissed doesn't make them weak.
Human beings ARE animals. We're primates. Great apes. Mammals. Our social structures and brains aren't that different, though our technology is quite different. One of the unusual aspects of our species is that we prey on our own species.
One of the things that makes men angry is violence against women. And yes, they tend to fly off the handle and wreck rapists. Maybe that's a better option than just giving them a stern talking-to.
Predators don't fear a scolding. They fear a beating.
We're a society.
People who invoke the "we're primates" canard are trying to avoid acknowledging the obligations that living in a society places on us.
I’m not sure you have that completely right. Understanding the primal heritage embedded in our nature is fairly essential to avoiding the misapprehension of causes and the misapplication of misguided prescriptions. Expecting to extirpate or entirely suppress that nature can invite very counterproductive and unwanted - even violent - repercussions.
What culture? Who is making who weak? What the fuck are you even talking about? Men are entering women's swimming competitions and getting away with it.
If men control men, what the fuck is going on in Afghanistan? GO TALK TO THEM.
Idiots who defend male stupidity are the lowest of the low. You morons literally live in a dream world. Stop making a fool of yourself.
Reducing physical education, and general denigration of any kind of manual work is making human beings weaker as a group.
Men as a group are generally appalled at men in women's sports. The primary folks defending that are non-sporty women. Talk to them.
Bullshit.
Men are the problem. They're not appalled at men like WIlliam "Lia" Thomas. They laugh at it, or they just don't care. It doesn't affect them so they don't care. If that wasn't true, it wouldn't be happening in the first place.
Most women don't support this. The ones who go along with it are dumb, but if the males weren't so stupid in the first place, there wouldn't be anything to go along with. If every woman stopped supporting it, men would still do it. That's the difference. Men are the origin of the problem.
Go talk to men. They are the origin of every issue.
And to think the patriarchy set up those swimming competitions just for women as a safe alternative to murder-jogging.
I would like to make this defense of male stupidity: the stupid men on this thread are managing to make you seem like an unhinged lunatic.
Do you have a mirror?
Why just Afghanistan...just look in your own ffffffking frontyards and backyards - 😱😵💫 you elect them.
That would require more self awareness than they're capable of.
And what kind of job are they doing?
I don't know.
Let's try neutering males who can't learn self control.
That works for livestock.
Livestock isn't neutered for behavior. Livestock is neutered to make larger and more tender meat. It doesn't eliminate sex differences.
You have to be joking.
Have you ever been around a bull or a stallion?
Right, men control men. But if there were no men, there would be far less need for control.
Stop calling them men.
They're males. If they were actual men instead of miserable little wannabes, we wouldn't have these problems.
Stop calling men men?
Eliminating males would exterminate the human species. Kind of the very most basic crime against humanity.
Not if you understand the difference between men and scrubs.
1) For now, we don't have to eliminate all males, only radically reduce their number. A tiny number of men can impregnate huge numbers of women.
2) Science is approaching the point where it can create sperm cells from stem cells.
3) It's impossible to have an intelligent discussion of these topics on social media.
Seriously? ALL The men in my life are strong, kind, smart, protective and provide for their families. I have sons who are the same. Gaslighting? What even is that. And if you think the female of our species have no capacity for violence you are seriously mistaken
Great.
Do you go for a walk by yourself at 2 am?
Because the female relatives of your attacker think the same thing about the men in their lives.
In my neighborhood, very few people go out at 2am if they can possibly avoid it. The rate of injury is unacceptably high. The vast majority of people who are physically injured at 2am are men, often younger men who were just trying to get home from the late shift.
Where do you live?
I see women going for walks all the time at 2 am. I get scared they’re going to find my hiding spot.
I wouldn't worry.
Most women aren't turning over rocks at that hour.
I can't deal with stupid people anymore.
I just can't.
And when you don’t get the answer you want to hear in your echo chamber you resort to calling people stupid …. Not particularly helpful, but for what it’s worth no man I know nor my sons have ever committed violence against a woman. Can I at least get some respect for that? Or do I get lumped into ‘stupid people’ category because I happen to think drugs, alcohol, mental health disease and perhaps just some plain bad and not just mad, men kill women? Sorry Kat, disagreeing with your opinion doesn’t make me stupid
"I just had lunch, why isn't anyone giving me credit for helping end world hunger???"
I hope I don’t hurt your case by agreeing with you. I sort of find the reasonable comments to be refreshing.
Oh good. Then DO go away. Your hate spewing is tiresome.
Yes you can. You just have to believe in yourself.
Male violence may be the problem. But it’s weak men that are the violent ones. Strong men don’t need to hurt and murder people to prove their power.
Pretty much my belief.
But the strong men in my life never blamed a woman for being attacked either.
And that's what I'm hearing.
You’re hearing a lot of things that haven’t been said. We can see you hearing them in real time. It’s very instructive.
If anything I said had been instructive to you, you would started saying smarter things.
But since you're too in love with the sound of your own voice, that's not happening.
Here, I'll make it easy for you. Don't listen to me -- listen to Dale.
If you told the guys waging war in the Ukraine, gang-raping tourists in India, beating their wives in Afghanistan, that they were "weak" what do you think they would say?
Obviously you have decided that you know it all and have the answers. Be a strong woman then and arm up and go jogging. Quit yer bitchin.
They'd likely fume and rage like any weak man called out on it usually does. Probably wilth violence.
You want to see a strong Afghani man, look at Malala"s father.
I think they’d be too weak to reply.
“Acting like men aren’t ALL evil”? Have you ever been informed that you are a radical bigot?
This is a terrible take. Both men and women live in this world. Demonising and blaming is a guaranteed pathway to failure. There are so many contradictions in how people think these days. I bet you wouldn’t appreciate us labelling ALL women as x. Too little honesty and understanding and too much hubris and self-righteousness.
Males got away with labeling ALL women all sorts of things for thousands of years, and they were fine with it. Nobody batted an eyelash, and they still don't.
Don't start crying now when males are getting called out for their bullshit and they can't get away with legally beating their wives to death anymore (well, at least in some parts of the world).
Idiotic.
I find it incredibly sad when people treat others poorly or with such disregard and excuse it away based on their negative perception of things others, note, others, have done in the past. It’s all too common now—no patience, no understanding, just hate, ambivalence or complete apathy. Hate begets hate. This is literally the first time you and I have interacted and look at the vitriol. Based on what? Your assumption, based solely on the belief simply that I potentially wield the same gender as those that may have wronged you in the past. My suggestion to you would be to stop reading hate literature and pick up something cheerier. Go out of your way to be nice to others and smile more. There are bad people, but believe it or not they’re in the minority, man or woman. If you allow someone to ruin your day over and over, eventually they’ll start ruining your week, then your month—before long all you’ll know is hate and you’ll be lashing out online at people you’ve never met. I wish you the best.
It seems to me the only reason they can’t get away with it is because other men won’t stand for it. Clearly based on the tenor of many of the pleading responses here it’s not because women have suddenly learned how to physically impose themselves on men.
And very few of the men around now are thousands of years old.
🎯💯
Undoubtedly, women face unique challenges and threats and I wouldn't diminish or ignore them. At the same time, many men suffer from their own difficulties, for these reasons:
1) Men are humans with feelings, too -- including anxiety and fear.
2) Men make up the majority of crime victims (and perpetrators, as well).
3) The vast majority of people killed during wartime are male, on either side of the conflict.
4) In line with point #3, the majority of homeless people are male, often as a result of their participation in combat for which they're given meager recompense.
5) Divorce proceedings frequently benefit one half of the relationship (the woman) to the detriment of the other half (the man). Then, the children suffer because they must navigate a fraught familial dynamic... and let's not forget that some of those children are boys.
Seriously Devin, you cannot really be responding to another woman being murdered with this!!!
That is male nature.
They do not have the ability to engage in self-criticism and awareness. They will hijack and turn every conversation into how they are the real victims because they're too self-absorbed to see that they are the problem.
There are indeed too many men like this.
Dang it. I agreed with you thinking you meant "Like this" referring to yourself. With no visual cues it's so hard to know. I'm also a sucker for the word "Indeed." It sounds so smart.
I didn't even get a like from you though. What the heck.
Agreed.
I kind of agree Beth - it’s insensitive
Kind of “ what about me syndrome?”
Yeah, here it is.
An article about male violence and dead women, and you IMMEDIATELY have to hijack, interrupt, change the subject, and act like men are the real victims because men are so fucking dumb they kill each other and themselves too.
Thanks for proving the point. Male stupidity is the problem. Shut the fuck up about divorce. STOP HIJACKING EVERY FUCKING CONVERSATION ABOUT THE MALE PROBLEM.
Good job proving the point though.
I think we have arrived at the nut meat here: male stupidity! Only men can really write stupid shit like this after reading the original post! For Christ's sake!
If you say that men are stupid because they engage in and suffer from violence more frequently, what would you say about aboriginal people in Australia, who engage in and suffer from violence more frequently still? Along with saying men are stupid, are you saying aboriginal people are stupid?
And if you would say that aboriginal people are less responsible because the circumstances of their lives make violence more likely, might we also find that similar considerations can apply for working class men?
Things become more difficult if you want to go beyond, "men bad!" in a discussion, looking instead at the broader contributors to violence. As with a public health issue like obesity, there are many factors contributing to it, and many manifestations of it as a problem.
Somewhere a giant dry dildo awaits quietly, just for thee
💯🔥🔥🎯
You cursed again.
1) studies show that man and women experience fear differently, particularly in violent intimate partner relationships.
2) men are not the majority of casualties from intimate partners violence. Women are by far.
3) studies show that women and children pay very high costs for war. Also it is government policy to not draft women and it was government policy for a long time to limit the jobs women could occupy on the military. These decisions are made by men, not women.
4) veterans are given lifelong compensation for disabilities suffered in conflict. They are also compensated for participating in conflict in the first place — pay that female veterans didn’t have access to.
5) divorce overwhelmingly causes women to take a financial hit. Women also pay a motherhood tax that reduces their earnings to start with.
I’m a veteran and a researcher.
Thank you.
Points well-made.
I would respond to #2, that women are primarily the victims of intimate partner violence, which is absolutely true. But the authour Freedman also mentioned stranger violence. So she is not asking why women are subject to domestic violence, or stranger violence - she's complaining that women are subject to violence at all.
Which is a fair complaint, but then it's reasonable to respond that men and impoverished minorities like aboriginal people are far more likely to suffer violence than a middle-class white woman like the authour or the vicitim of the horrendous crime which evidently inspired this article.
Devin,
#3 Only if you ignore civilian casualties.
#5 Not long term and we've known that for 30 years.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5992251/
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2009/jan/25/divorce-women-research
Yep, still all about men. Sure. Look look it's all about men!!
Puhleeeze. You are not going to be able to level up into the meaningful discussion.
46% of US domestic abuse victims are men.
Source?
Do you think maybe the immediate cause of women dying at the hands of their intimate partners (a leading cause of death for women) is problems with policing and the criminal justice system that have always ensured violence against women is not taken seriously?
Do you think maybe it’s exacerbated because women cannot leave a dangerous space as easily as men can?
Did you know a leading cause of death in men is also violence…but from other men?
Did you know that over half of the homicides against women occur in the private sphere, whereas only 12% of homicides against men do? Does it strike you as odd that women are likelier to be killed by the men who purportedly love them than by anyone else?
Did you know that the rates of violence from men towards women have been relatively consistent over time — that they didn’t rise significantly just because women obtained more legal rights or began working or any other advances that might have empowered women to “emasculate” men?
Just curious what actual research you’ve done into data on men and rates of violence before attributing these highly specific causal factors to it.
"Do you think maybe the immediate cause of women dying at the hands of their intimate partners (a leading cause of death for women) is problems with policing and the criminal justice system that have always ensured violence against women is not taken seriously?"
In the last full year of reporting 2020-21, there were 25 women victims of partner homicide; see p38 of the linked pdf. This is the lowest number recorded in the period covered by the report since 1989-90. I would not characterise 25 deaths as a "leading cause of death".
"Both the domestic and acquaintance homicide rates have halved since 1989‒90." (p7)
So while these are horrendous crimes, they are decreasing over time. This suggests that while there may still be problems with the system taking women victims seriously, it's considerably improved over the last generation. Things can and should get better - but they are improving, and we should be glad of that.
https://www.aic.gov.au/sites/default/files/2023-03/sr42_homicide_in_australia_2020-21.pdf
You are FUCKING kidding me?
You want to whine that it's our own fault you're killing us because we don't want protectors?
LIKE YOU DIDN'T FUCKING KILL US WHEN YOU WERE ACTUALLY THE PROTECTORS?
Thank you so much for reminding us that some males have no clue how to be human beings much less men.
Why do you keep saying “you’re killing us” to people who aren’t killing you? It’s an odd phrasing.
People defend, protect and/or control the things they own, irrespective of how they think they feel about it. For women to have agency in a society, there needs to be a broader change to the subtext that women are a thing that is owned.
Rachel, no one in the civilized world believes women are a thing to be owned. Bad things happen because evil people exist. It's not like our male children are growing up thinking it's OK to murder women.
The article argues that men should do a better job of defending women. Are you arguing that men will only defend women if we feel we own them? Your second sentence literally contradicts the first. Are you arguing that woman can only be protected if they "have" agency? Our vice president is a woman. Women hold positions of power at literally every level of society. What agency is left for them to "have" that they do not already?
Hi Jason, scarcity principle applies here which is a proxy for ownership, for example the most dangerous time for a woman in a relationship, lets use your parlance, with an ‘evil’ man, is when she’s leaving him. Ponder on what subconscious bias he has going on in his mind for a moment. Now no one indeed raised him to murder anyone however a broader societal message, over spans of time, suggest women are the weaker sex for example, and more messaging (witches, gold diggers etc) that negates the fact that in today’s world women can be educated and provide for themselves, do kick boxing etc. Agency means a person is able to make decisions about themselves and their life without interference. There’s no contradiction. So it’s really about societal thresholds of behaviours that are accepted, despite the public declarations to the opposite. Eg. A sign says a U Turn cannot be done at an intersection but over time one person does it, others see and more and more drivers repeat the behaviour. If you do a poll, Molly he majority of those drivers strongly agree road signs must be obeyed, and yet they feel permission from the crowd to disobey it. It’s a clumsy analogy but hope it gives you something to ponder about the broader permissions, not explicitly expressed.
Rachel, it doesn't. You will have to state your argument more clearly. Are you arguing, like the article, that men need to step up and start protecting women better or are you arguing that men need do nothing to protect women except stop thinking it's OK to murder them?
I reject your argument that women are being murdered because men see other men do it and think it's OK. Whether conscious or unconscious, it's not a normal thought that men have that it's somehow OK to murder women. Women should stop being involved with men who think this way. Ideally, they would never start dating such a man. Evil should be recognized and cut from the dating pool.
My argument is that perhaps we should return to teaching people that women are the "weaker" sex and men have a responsibility to protect them. What's wrong with this idea? Mia is arguing that women are being dominated by men (because they are "stronger") and she calls on other men to defend women. Men won't do this if we, as a society, continue to tell them women have no need to be protected.
What is wrong with saying that women are intelligent, capable humans who can achieve anything they set their mind too, but they are also physically incapable of defending themselves in some situations? I promise you there are plenty of men willing to treat women like God's gift (which they are) while also being willing to give their own lives to protect them.
Men don't need to protect anything.
They can't even stay out of women's bathrooms.
They just need to stop acting so fucking crazy. This is literally too much to ask.
I agree men should stay out of women's bathrooms. They also should not masquerade as girls in order to bully them in sports or any other endeavor. There are millions upon millions of men who agree. Perhaps we should stop supporting the politicians and psychopaths who think these things are OK.
I can't even get into a women's bathroom. The lines are always so long.
Touché Jason. I don’t need to explain it more clearly for you, you need critical thinking. I’m going shopping now because I’m a woman. And should anyone attempt to interfere with my agency while I’m out I know I can take care of myself and don’t need some dude stepping in thinking he’s a superhero who needs my gratitude. God bless.
Thank you for the blessings. I feel my critical thinking is supported by my comments. Stay safe out there.
I.e. It’s nice that you feel safe enough to express such a spunky posture, but It is clear you fundamentally don’t understand the nature of the world you live in. You appear to see individual data points and highlight their significance without having yet pieced them into a coherent whole. I’m afraid the worldview you hold and espouse would be catastrophic if it were not kept in check by others who are better acquaintanced with the underlying reality you have yet to appreciate.
You’re going shopping by the grace of the patriarchy I guess. From what I understand it’s doubtful you’d get far or have much to shop for otherwise.
A big thank you to Jason and others like him seems in order.
I hope you won't be jogging there. It's super dangerous.
Rachel? Did you ever come back from shopping?
Rented, maybe?
You should be ashamed of yourself.
I think woman-murderers should be ashamed of themselves. They make a bad name for regular murderers who just want to mind their own business and murder men.
Yawn @ troll.
It’s been a fun Saturday. Silly people.
You are allowed! Please break the collective apathy. Women cannot do this alone and we are tired of feeling unsafe.
Then I ask again, what would you have us do? What are you asking for? It's not enough to say we should "break the collective apathy." I don't know any men who are apathetic that women get killed. Even if they were, breaking the apathy would only make them care. It wouldn't stop anything. So, what is it that you are asking us to do to make you feel safe?
Dude. It's not women's jobs to tell us how to be good men! You're giving a great example of the thing you're complaining about, passive-aggressive male BS.
I suspect you have as much hate for yourself as you do for anyone. That probably won’t be solved here.
I never said it was. I asked what exactly they wanted us to do. There's a difference. The response "just go be good men" is childish and ridiculous. Good men are already good men. Good men already oppose bad men. Good men are raising their sons to be good men.
You want good men to simply go tell bad men to "do better?" What kind of asinine solution is that?
It's not their job to figure out for you how to be a good man. That was your mommy's job, and that's done now. Figure it out for yourself. That's what a real man does. He doesn't demand a to-do list.
You have so much hate, little Hazel-rah. It’s a wonder to behold how easy it flows.
Stop hijacking the conversation when women point out the issue and go talk to men. You are the problem.
The conversation was a cry for men to help protect women. I feel like we are part of that conversation. I'm not the problem. If you think that violent men will respond to other men but not women you're living in a fantasy world.
Males only listen to other males because males innately do not respect women.
If that weren't the case, none of this would be happening in the first place.
Go talk to other males. Leave women alone. You are the problem because males by their nature do not have the ability to engage in self-criticism and reality.
I have treated you with far more respect than you have treated me. So...
It's not innate that we don't respect women. Sometimes our respect for certain women is torpedoed by reading their comments.
When I read this, my first reaction was to agree and applaud the writer for calling out the centuries old violence against women but then I pause and have to accept that, like Jason points out, the world is and always has been a violent place and since the beginning of time weaker individuals will be hurt and killed by stronger or more sinister ones, there’s really nothing we can do to change the nature of the beast, however as a woman, a mother and now grandmother of females I know the message my son is reaching his daughter is to resist the influences of the feminist society and to never go through the world as-if you’re just as safe as a man. There was a time where a women not only wouldn’t go out running ever, she wouldn’t show flesh as it was believed to be indecent, an enticement to male urges. How do we in 2024 believe that’s changed? Sure we can be as vulgar as say, Miley Cyrus on stage and claim she “free and expressive” but that’s complete bullshit. Feminists (mind you none of which of those elites would ever do any of the things they tout as ‘free’ themselves) for decades have drilled into women that unless you act and behave like a man you’re weak and hopeless and should be ashamed of wanting any man to help or protect you so…. Here we are now where women of any age at any time are prey for violence and now you want protection? Now after as Jason points out, you've completely castrated an entire generation of men you want them to run to your aid? My advise writer is to think long and hard about where you are as a young women in this world and do everything you can to help the rest of us undone the shitstorm mess the Feminists left for us to clean up and concentrate on how you can be a part of the movement to undo all the damage that’s been done. Oh, and definitely don’t go for a f**king run at night.
Whilst some of the above I agree with. None of this is the issue here.
The issue is simply men raping and killing other people and it being the norm.
Yes, and no, Jason.
I feel that the message that needs to be repeated constantly is respect.
It is not about anti-bullying, or respect for women, but respect for everyone - people are entitled to their respectful opinions and should be free to state them without fear of violence or put-downs. If we are all taught from infancy to respect others, to abhor violence, perhaps women would not need to fear.
I agree. I wish that others here did as well. There's a great irony in what you've said and how some people have treated me on this particular issue here.
I might disagree on one small aspect. The author wanted to know why men today won't protect women. While I agree we should abhor senseless violence, I think we need, and should teach our boys, to be willing to physically act to protect others. This may require violence in some situations. Part of my original point, perhaps lost in the vitriol, is that in the effort to reduce violence we have stripped our young men of the very traits needed to help protect others.
I wholeheartedly reject the idea, shared on these comments) that ALL men are inherently violent animals and women will never be safe around us. This argument has no basis in history or logic. It's not silencing women or ignoring their concerns to put this out.
3.5x men are murdered per year than women in America.
BY WHO, BITCH?
Be kind Kat. You’re doing that vicious hatred thing that you disapprove of in others again.
BY MEN, HO! Men will always be violent. Identity politics morons like you will never do a thing to mitigate the problem. The only thing that can be done is to build a better society with better economic outcomes across the board but we're going the opposite direction with essentialists like you playing handmaiden to capital as they strip society for parts. Enjoy your rainbow feminist capitalism and the increased violence that comes part and parcel with it.
You are full of advice for everyone except men, about which your only comment is a shrug, “men are violent”.
That’s a BS copout. Men are as violent as we raise them to be. It’s up to us to focus more on the violence problem in how we raise boys, if we want to lessen the violence problem in men.
Men are as violent as men have always been lol. It's opportunity, prosperity and family that decides how often their violence sees the light of day and it doesn't help that one of two political parties has made worshiping a permanent lumpenproletariat they've created a major part of their identity.
This may come as a shock to you, but reacting to male violence as if you were Beavis & Butthead doesn't inspire anyone to take anything else you say seriously, except other Beavises and Buttheads.
So enjoy your permanent adolescence I guess.
We should definitely have some sort of punishment for woman-murder. And maybe put up signs to remind people where it is not permitted.
Not just a troll, but a boring unwitty troll.
My mom likes me. She thinks I’m hilarious.
There is some hope that men will stand up against patriarchy in silent and loud ways. Power over women starts there.
"All too often in this world men are condemned for being men." This is so true. Men don't much even hold the door open anymore, for fear of offending!
Thank you Mia for expressing how we are all feeling- angry, overwhelmed and exhausted. I want my daughter to be safe. This must be seen as a men’s issue.
As a woman who was viciously mugged by multiple men whilst checking my letterbox at my apartment block when I was in my 20s, I applaud you for giving this topic airtime. The police told me that every woman who goes through something as brutal as I did will learn to be more alert and conscious of her surroundings. She will cross the road when she feels unsafe, or enter a business or call someone. Through my life I’ve met and asked men (he/him) if they’ve ever been given this advice or had this feeling and I have only ever come up with blanks.. unless they are gay or identify as “they”. Yes there is evil in the world but men don’t seem to have to walk through the world on high alert anticipating it, the way that women do!
“In 2022, the FBI reported that there were 14,441 victims of murder who identified as male, compared to 4,251 victims of murder who identified as female in the United States.”
“According to the data given by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, worldwide, 79% of homicide victims are men, and in 193 of the 202 listed countries or regions, men were more likely to be killed than women.”
I suspect everyone who gets murdered is tired of getting murdered.
55% of all homicides of women are caused by their male partners. Only 12% of all homicides of men are.
Both men and women are most likely to be killed by…men. Men are killing everyone.
Men mostly do not kill the men they live with. But women are more likely to be killed by the men they live with than by anyone else.
Understood. I think all of those points are important to recognize. Men as a broad category are more violent, more prone to aggression, and more capable of acting on those tendencies with lethal force than are women. And men would do well to understand the sense of comparative fear and vulnerability many women feel in this context.
If the aim is simply to decry the broad category of men though, I think that starts to become an exemplification of bigotry. Most men do not fall into the category of “men who murder or abuse women.” For most men, those who do so are contemptible.
But it's not just about a lack of understanding among individual men. It's about a persistent historical and global lack of understanding on a systemic level that perpetuates the violence women face at the hands of men. Those systems, too, are overwhelmingly dominated by men. So in a sense, yes, this is a problem perpetuated by men.
Gender can, believe it or not, be the best predictor of a certain outcome. For women, their gender best predicts their likelihood of being killed by an intimate partner. So it is a gender-based problem.
And for men, their gender predicts being killed under virtually every other circumstance. It’s not a pretty picture in either case.
I’m not sure I agree with you about the systemic problem you’ve described. I could make the same case decrying the apparent permission of the patriarchy for men to be killed in numbers that dwarf those of women. Overwhelmingly men seek to protect women and ensure their safety. We would not likely be having this discussion at all were that not so.
The point is that women don't kill men. Men kill women. And men kill men. Therefore men have a problem with killing. It's not rocket science.
When it comes to intimate partner violence, I suggest you learn exactly why women are so vulnerable to it. There are any number of lengthy historical studies to detail the myriad reasons why it has always been difficult for women to leave violent men, whether due to financial control, coercive control, legal barriers, a desire to protect children subject to violence, inaction from police, a lack of legal protection, lack of shelter, and so on. We can even identify the time at which a woman is most likely to be killed by her intimate partner (when she actually leaves him). This is a global phenomenon not limited to a single country. Maybe spend less time trying to defend homicidal men and more time trying to learn about the issues women and children face at the hands of men.
Whoa. I thought you were a sensible person. I never defended homicidal men. Nevermind. Crushing disappointment.
You do seem a little sleepy.
What you seem to be completely missing is that women aren't doing the killing!!!
Neither is anyone I know. I would try to talk them out of it. The woman-murdering men out there just don’t listen. So frustrating.
This guy is not worth the effort.
I’m not seeing much effort in the first place. Emoting is not thinking.
I see you thought bringing data in would help your argument. But you seem to be saying that in order to achieve parity more women need to be murdered, and I cannot condone this! Shun.
Get a job, you fucking loser.
Well said. I assume you do this a lot.
👍
Lol "identified as male"
Men are more likely to be killed--BY OTHER MALES. They treat each other like shit because they hate each other.
Kat, you may be noticing a general trend of pushback in this conversation, especially from men, against the idea that it is “men” in general as a category who are responsible for the fear engendered amongst women by the violence perpetrated by a very small contingent of men. The lax articulation of the issue results in a calumny against men who bear no more affiliation with the actions of those perpetrators than you do except by virtue of an accident of demography. We oppose and revile those men. We also have a bone to pick at being lumped in with murderers.
You and many others here seem oddly comfortable with this slander, which of course good men are going to find objectionable. We know it is generally men who are the perpetrators of violence as well as the victims. We are aware there is a heightened proclivity towards aggression that is often expressed in male nature. Quite frankly we live with that and have to grapple with it and channel it in ways you may not. Most men do so in commendable fashion, but certainly those who do not often cause terrible individual and societal harm, and the problem of poorly socialized men is a perennial one. It’s a struggle everyone has a shared interest in recognizing and understanding with dead-eyed clarity.
Sharpen up the articulation and sharpen up the understanding of the problem, ditch the broadband hate, and you won’t end up alienating the people whose support you most need to marshal towards improving the status quo.
Or don’t. Despite the grave subject matter and tragic fact of so many seeming so fearful, the broad primal screes against men are painfully funny to a lot of us in a way. It’s like watching a child screech at the mall. You wouldn’t get the eye-rolls if you were better at using your words.
One illegal immigrant kills someone and all immigrants should be deported.
The 9/11 hijackers fly planes into buildings and all Muslims are terrorists.
Roughly 5000 women got killed in the US in 2021, by a man -- and oh, no, we can't blame all men!
Why not?
We do when it's any other group.
https://bjs.ojp.gov/female-murder-victims-and-victim-offender-relationship-2021#:~:text=The%20percentage%20of%20females%20murdered,intimate%20partner%20(figure%201).
I’m sorry, do you agree that all Muslims are terrorists and that all immigrants should be deported because they are killers? If so, kudos for your consistency. If not, why alert us to your incoherent ways of reasoning?
Also, that man has got to hold the record. 5,000 is way above average.
True.
But the last excuse is used mainly by the people who are happy to blame immigrants, Muslims and black teenage boys because of one incident.
Funny how collective blame works just fine for them as long as we're not talking about straight white men.
Countries all around the world have to pass laws to prevent adult men from marrying children.
Men are the problem. I don't care that not EVERY SINGLE man kills a woman. The fact that the bar for male behavior is literally in hell proves my point. They can't even stay out of girls' bathrooms.
Men are the problem.
Get a job.
You’re not being very helpful here Kat. But your hatred for men is noted.
Are you under the impression there are no female pedophiles? How many people think it's "romantic" when a teacher targets a middle school boy for "special attention." The double standards are gross.
Really reinforces the simple fact that too many men feel we women & girls are put on earth for their use & enjoyment.
All other men need to say “Stop killing women & girls now” - there is NEVER a justification for wilfully taking someone’s life”
Stop killing women and girls now! I hope that helps. I said it to a guy in line at the grocery store too. He said he’d think about it but he looked sketchy.
Troll forum is that way -------------------------------->>>>>
Listen Hazelnut, this whole anti-troll thing is gonna get you a bad reputation.
I refuse to live my life in fear. It’s a choice. You don’t have live in fear. A healthy fear is ok. For making better choices.
There is always danger. That’s just part of life. And as far a danger to women. We could be in a lot worse places around the world. I can’t help but feel gratitude for being born and raised here..
Very nice to read such a well-adjusted perspective offered.
Wish I could really block you. Your comments are the worst.
Weird. I didn’t even know you existed.
This one’s not so bad, is it? I get high praise for my comments.
I would love this piece to be published where more men could read it. I could hear your voice rising in this piece Mia, and I was with you at every step xx
If only we could get it published where more murderers would read it. I feel it would give them pause.
If only you had a life outside trolling. The smell drifting out from under your rock is quite unpleasant, time for you to return and close the rock down after you.
What if I really was a troll and you were calling me a troll as an insult and saying all these mean things about trolls to try to hurt my feelings ? Don’t you think it would be hurtful to trolls? Do you even think about the things you say before you say them? We have feelings too, you know. Look deeper before you lash out like that next time. Just cruel.
Very well written, It’s like you read my mind… Poor Samantha murdered running in daylight near home. No where seems safe anymore if you are a woman. City/country or day/night 💔
From the moment girls are old enough to go out without parents we are taught to be vigilant. We carry this vigilance with us throughout our lives, through all ages and stages. And we accept it as ‘normal’, it is ingrained in us. Oh to live in a world where we feel no trepidation, no threat, require no vigilance! Thanks Mia for voicing our fear, our anger and our demands! Now, if only ‘they’ would listen and act.
They is too busy worrying about they’s pronouns I would guess.
Sorry, I've never been harassed or attacked by a trans person.
So not sure why you want to make them the problem outside of laziness.
About the laziness...It took me a long time to write that. I type really slow and not good. Also thinking is hard, too as well also.
I may have misunderstood the they they was referring to.
So much to unpack here. One of which is the clear implication that anything less than the eradication of murder from society wouldn't prevent a sufficiently impassioned person from writing an essay like this.
And from one perspective, you can think: "Well, why not? Why shouldn't we strive to end all suffering, starting with a commitment to engineer murder of out of society?"
But if we're being realistic, if we're accepting that, as much as we loathe it, as much as we wish it weren't true, murder will be with us, then how sober would this article's point of view be in a world where murder is committed with less frequency than it already is?
Because even in a world where murder is more exceedingly rare, you could still write this exact same article. You could list all the names of those lives wrongly taken away, you could call people to action, and yet -- wouldn't something seem off?
Wouldn't we be asking for a modicum of perspective and context amidst the outrage that implores us to see danger at every turn, no matter how irrational that idea?
An Australian Institute of Criminology report from 1999 stated that 125 women are murdered each year in Australia. The Guardian, in a report from this March, put the number at 64 for 2023.
And in a recent AIHW report, it states:
"The domestic homicide victimisation rate decreased from 0.8 to 0.3 per 100,000 people from 1989–90 to 2020–21 in the NHMP (the AIC's National Homicide Monitoring Program):
- The female victimisation rate decreased from 0.9 to 0.3 per 100,000 females.
- The male victimisation rate decreased from 0.6 to 0.3 per 100,000 males."
Every innocent life is precious. But in light of these figures, how rational, how much perspective can this article lay claim to?
How helpful is the catastrophizing tone -- a topic that NYU professor and social psychologist Jonathan Haidt has written about extensively?
In his book, "The Coddling of the American Mind," Haidt and coauthor Greg Lukianoff warn against cognitive distortions like catastrophizing, emotional reasoning, negative filtering and overgeneralizing.
All of which could arguably be said are hallmarks of this essay.
It employs repetitive rhetoric to elicit an emotional response and win over sympathy:
-- Eight instances of "we are murdered" in the first 16 lines.
-- A context-free assertion that "Men keep killing us."
-- Twelve variations of "We are tired" -- which perversely seems to prioritize the stress of having to even think about the dangers of the world above those whose lives were ended.
It reinforces its own sense of catastrophe, that danger lurks everywhere and is waiting for you at every turn.
It is, at its core, a complaint against existence itself. Why should I have to take precautions -- it exhausts me. It offends me to have to worry about my surroundings when I might be vulnerable in the rare case that someone wants to do me harm.
It talks about the emotional toll of hearing footsteps and wondering "Is this it?" And yet -- was that it? Or were they really just the footsteps of someone you're sharing the planet with?
I'm a man, and I can tell you it's nervewracking to be in the awful position of minding my own business, walking to my own car in a parking garage, or along a street at night, and suddenly finding that I'm behind a woman BECAUSE WE HAPPEN TO BE GOING IN THE SAME DIRECTION.
Ask your male friends how many of us wish we could be anywhere else. How many of us intentionally take another path or slow down to a snail's pace so the woman in front of us doesn't have this irrational feeling that we're about to harm her.
Ask your male friends who are runners if they feel invincible. I've been running in my neighborhood for 12 years. And always at night. I'm always concerned.
I know I'm in danger. But to run in daylight hours would be worse, because that's when I've been verbally attacked with a homosexual slur for simply running. When I've been confronted by a zealous neighbor for daring to exercise past her house without permission.
So I run at night, when there are fewer people on the road. Because being able to run while taking on some small amount of danger is a tradeoff I'm willing to make. I keep within my residential neighborhood, I leap to sidewalks when a car approaches, and that's about it. This isn't taxing, unjust labor. And if someone wants to shoot me or attack me with a knife, I'm probably not making it out. Being a man doesn't make me invulnerable.
You recognize the dangers and you do your best to mitigate them according to a risk calculus that works for you.
You get behind the wheel; you put on your seatbelt.
Or you resolve to never drive again.
Weird, nowhere in the article did it demand a complete elimination of femicide, nor even imply it.
Which makes half of your post one very large strawman.
Citing relevant statistics is helpful.
Trying to dismiss the validity of thoughts about murder for being too emotional is not.
Hate is blinding, clearly. The point being made is one regarding the proportionality and proper allocation of the fear and outrage. Since no supply of data will sway you towards recognizing that men and women are both subject to violence, and in measures contrary to the thrust of the article, and you feel this is a problem solely for the men who have no part in such violence to solve, it seems you may be reveling in your need to spill your own venom more than you are proving a useful advocate for your own positions, much less a contributor to a productive conversation.
If the best you can offer is another throw away dismissal, I think that will be pretty glaringly evident to everyone. You really aren’t the arbiter of this discussion.
Squash away Hazelnut. I await the devastation of your rapist wit.
It's as if a cockroach started arguing with me about the meaning of life as I was about to squash it....
It is mind boggling how many women have been abused or murdered by men ( and not always by men known to them! ), in this country and around the world. This is the epitome of our inequality in just one major way. Never mind wages etc - how do we get some protection for women if even ordinary men won’t stand up for us??
Most of us are opposed to murdering women and think it should be illegal.
I’m with you on that. It should not be taught in schools either. #changethecurriculum
Bye troll! ------------------------------------>>>>>>
Hazelnut! 🤣🙏🏾
Unless you live in Texas and vote Republican.
Because denying women life saving care is ethically murder.
I live in Texas and vote Republican and I don't support murdering anyone. Especially unborn babies.
I can’t believe you actually think murder is ethical! I just can’t agree with you.
Nearly all infanticide is perpetrated by women.
I would like to formally lodge a complaint blaming all women for their complicity in the killing of young children. Please stop. Especially you women who have never killed any children. You are the biggest problem. Your denial that all women are the problem is the problem. Arguing that very few women kill children is also part of the problem. Arguing that there is something wrong with the very few women who kill children is also ALSO part of the problem.
How are we supposed to solve problems if we refuse to get confused about the problem? Please recognize that everyone who is not the problem are the problem!!
Stop voting for gun grabbers. Then: 1. You can readily buy a firearm and learn to use and carry it; 2. More armed women who refuse to be victims=fewer perps who will target you.
I don’t know. If the precision of thought on display in this comments section is any indication, there would be bullets flying angrily in every random direction and many innocent people would be killed.
Get a gun, train with it regularly, and carry it everywhere. Guns are the great equalizer. Guns in the hands of women are a practical, readily available solution for this problem. And if that is not legal in your area, it’s because libs have voted for female disarmament, and thus are clearly IN FAVOR of female victimization. GUN RIGHTS ARE WOMEN’S RIGHTS. If you’d rather complain about the existence of evil (which has been with us since the beginning and will never go away) than defend yourself against it, you are choosing to be a victim.
More guns equals more violence. Take it from an American.
Thankfully, there was never violence before guns.
But there was strawmanning.
I will never take it from an American! Americans do bad things and you do NOTHING to stop them! GO TALK TO YOUR OTHER AMERICANS INSTEAD OF BOTHERING PEOPLE HERE! BYE! (Sorry I shouted.) But now, bye.
Oh never mind. You can stay. Sigh.
I believe this is a fellow American. My apologies for him. Our gun nuts are pretty crazy.
So you're saying the solution is I should shoot every man I see as a threat?
Bet you you won't like the results.
My point exactly. You haven’t learned to parse the good from the bad.
You and a few others are doing the equivalent here without a gun.
Do you think I know losers like you IRL?
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Please.
I'm quite sure you do know losers like me. We run almost everything.
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Which is of course why you have all day to troll.
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
It's my first time on the internet.
What does IRL mean? I'm trying to figure out how its pronounced, but my tongue won't do it. Is it like "Earl"? Like the tea?
If you are experiencing homocidial ideation you should seek immediate mental help.
Why?
According to all of you, I have no reason to feel threatened.
So when you walk down the street, you should wonder if it's "homicidal ideation" or not. I mean I could be a perfectly normal looking person.
Or I could be a nutcase who is going to pop off the next man who starts harassing me.
You make a great case for why men should carry too.
Whiny little males already carry.
I believe you, don't worry. You could be a nutcase.
Fun at parties I bet.
😁
Not something you'll ever find out.
Can we also talk about the fact that two thirds of murders in Australia are of men?
How do i look after my son, my husband, my father?
Where's the outrage?
Do you your son, husband and father have to worry about getting attacked on a morning run as much as a woman does? Do they need to take as many precautions?
You have so much hate to give. I’m glad you have a place to do it where it can be seen by others who might learn from it.
Oh look, the troll is still trying to pretend not to be a troll.
You made your choice, troll. Back under your rock now.
Are you a child? I’m really just curious. It feels that way reading your comments. They give the impression of a fairly undeveloped person with no ability to trade in nuance without resorting to insults.
The troll really, really wants to convince us now that he's not actually an obnoxious little insect.
Well I've got great news for you, troll! There's a way you can do that.
1. Go and delete all your of your troll-y comments.
2. Post an apology to everyone in the comments section for being such a troll.
3. Promise to never do it again, and ask for forgiveness.
It's not a guarantee, but it's your best shot.
But I like my comments. They were making the same points, just for those who were able to understand them. I’ve tried to spell it out for you since, but you’re still stuck in humorless autism mode.
Well clearly yes they have to take greater precautions if they have 100% greater chances of being murdered. But they tend not to take those precautions because it's never talked about and noone seems to care. When's the last article you read about it Vs how many have you read about women. Somehow we should be outraged about harm to women but men are disposable. Do you know the names of any of the men who were murdered last year or their circumstances? Why do they matter so little? Why isn't murder of any human being horrifying?
I’m talking about going for a run in the morning. I was hoping it could serve as a rhetorical question.
No, males don’t need to worry nearly as much as females in that situation.
I’m pretty sure that’s an example of why you hear women complaining more about this issue than men.
Why does only the threat during running in the morning specifically matter? Why is this the only circumstance that is worth discussing?, why are coward punches and domestic violence of men not an issue? Why is it ok to send young men to war? Or into dangerous jobs? I dot't get why 'the morning run' murder matters more than all the others. Men are at greater risk of assault just walking down the street than women. Maybe not in the morning run because they can run faster, but choosing this example is the definition of cherry-picking your argument to suit the narrative. Exactly how many women have been murdered on Thier morning run in Australia? And is it more or less than the number killed by sharks?
Because we are talking about losing public spaces.
All public spaces.
How many male murders involve alcohol?
According to my data, 12.
It's the subject of the article, and an excellent example of how women are more vulnerable than men are even when they do everything right, and as a result reasonably suffer more from fear and all of the problems that come from it. There is nothing more they can reasonably be expected to do, so if it's going to get better they need help from society at large. THAT'S WHY THEY'RE TELLING US.
If a man wants to be safer from being murdered, he knows, or should know, that avoiding doing dumb, reckless dangerous shit will help a lot in that regard. But clearly, men are as a whole choosing to place themselves in personal situations of greater risk of being murdered, even aside from their job choices. It's a lot harder to feel sympathy for those men, and I'm not hearing them asking for it.
I'm sure that if you wrote an article about those other problems you mention, a lot of people would sympathize with you. But in this context, it just looks like hand-waving.
Let's just give women a mid-day work hiatus so they can take their run then so we can focus on actual murder outcomes instead you silly white knight. Sound good?
That's the perception, but it's not true. When it comes to murder, women are safer in public than men. The situation is reversed in the home, on average.
It is true. If you want to compare safety, you have to compare similar situations.
Men do a lot more reckless, stupid, aggressive, dangerous sh*t than women do. That's why they get murdered more.
Women get murdered even when they do everything they can reasonably be expected to do to keep themselves safe. That's part of why it's worse for them. They understandably feel HELPLESS and ANGRY, in addition to feeling unsafe.
Do men feel helpless? No. They know that even if they get themselves into a dangerous situation, they have a reasonable chance of getting themselves out of it.
Some every murdered man has it coming because he was reckless and stupid? I believe that we have heard this song before. It's called "victim blaming." It's a bad look no matter what sex is being targeted.
Your response to 2/3 of murders in this major western country are men = "but they probably don't think twice to take a morning run"?! You are truly regarded.
It's true, I am. Thank you 😇
I regard you.
Are those men being murdered by women?
No?
Then you have the same problem.
What percentage of men would you say murder women? It has to be most men, I would guess. And the ones who don’t are probably just too lazy. They just stand around and don’t do anything. Ugh.
36% of murdered women are murdered by someone known to them if that helps your math.
It doesn’t. The brown fox jumped over the silver moon, if that helps your reading.
You can't even get that right?
I know it starts with "The." Then there's some other words after that. I think one of them is fox. The silver moon fox the brown something. Or maybe it was two fox. The silver moon gave two fox about thinking clearly...?
You think you’re clever. You’re really not. You’re a pathetic troll who needs to up the amount of time they spend touching grass.
That was mean. :(
The brown moon jumped over the silver fox.
That doesn't seem right.
The silver fox jumped over the brown moon?