5 ms·

> That seems to be as much the source of the problem as the sigma itself. No. The original rape is worse than anything the relief agency does.

kijin 7y ago
The parent said stigma (misspelled as sigma), not the original rape. Rape > social stigma == neglect by relief agencies
- rectang 7y ago
  > social stigma == neglect by relief agencies Still a resounding "no". Demonizing relief agencies as being as bad as societal homophobia? You honestly think relief agencies are in it for the money and are minimizing male rape?
  - hulahoof 7y ago
    I personally believe that some charities / relief services in almost all areas are in it for the money. Of course, my beliefs don't amount to anything other than researching who I personally give money to, but I do not find it far-fetched to believe that some agencies act in bad faith; I have a hard time aligning with the false memory syndrome foundation for example.
    - rectang 7y ago
      Being acquainted with people who volunteer in such relief agencies, I cannot tell you how disgusted I am to see their efforts denigrated as profit driven. They are typically rape victims themselves, each with their own individual stories — not just statistical females who have experienced statistical rape. The idea that they would not sympathize with male rape victims is just... appalling. Are you saying you know such people? Name names.
      - handedness 7y ago
        This oversimplifies the situation. An NGO can be profit-driven while the actual volunteers and workers who do much good are not. Did you read the article? This is not an entirely uncommon situation, either. The corruption is often seen as a cost of doing business by interested parties with other priorities, something which all parties are usually generally aware. After a war (a scenario in which NGOs thrive) the existing social structure that has the capacity and organization to execute projects is often the winning faction, which as often as not didn't prevail by being virtuous.
      - orpheline 7y ago
        To state that some relief agencies are - I'd say success-driven rather than profit-driven - is not an attack on the people in direct contact with, and assisting, victims. There is an unavoidable gap between volunteers at the forefront of relief efforts, and the people running the agency. Like any other organization, relief agencies need funding, they need support from local government, they need positive publicity if they're to continue. The people doing those jobs are focused on those results, not the work those in the field are doing. You asked for an example. About 20 years ago, my colleagues' three-year-old daughter was kidnapped from in front of her apartment house. She was a sweet, blue-eyed, blonde-haired child, and her search became a huge media frenzy: non-stop reporting as police followed lead after lead. She started working with a local branch of a national missing children's organization. At her first meeting, the director told her that her daughter' disappearance was "the best thing that has happened to them" because the publicity pulled in so many donations. He wasn't a bad person, or incident to get daughter; but his role was making the agency successful, and he evaluated things from that standpoint. I don't think that's at all unusual for these agencies.
    - hulahoof 7y ago
      I can't reply to your comment, rectang, so I hope this will suffice. You will notice I did not call out anyone for denying help to make rape victims, merely that I believe bad actors exist in all facets of society. I by no means am putting down the hard work of the heroes who give their time to help people. I find your black and white response just as disgusting, to ignore that people can take positions of power over others and abuse them. As for naming names, I have given an example of an organisation I find abhorrent.
      - rectang 7y ago
        > I find your black and white response just as disgusting, to ignore that people can take positions of power over others and abuse them. Because the relief agencies you accuse of predation contribute more towards human suffering than rapists? Keep fighting the good fight, hulahoof!
  - kijin 7y ago
    The article explicitly mentions some who are concerned that putting a spotlight on male victims will take a chunk out of their piece of the cake. If a so-called relief agency is worried more about their market share than the absolute number of people they're helping, I'm not sure whether they should be called a relief agency at all.
  - manigandham 7y ago
    This is explicitly discussed in the article and even quoted by the previous comment you replied to.
rndgermandude 7y ago
For the individual victim, the rape is certainly a lot worse than what those agencies do. However, at scale, agencies that try to censor information and reports about rape/violence other than male-on-female rape/violence might do a lot of harm regardless, be it through stigma, or be it through denying victims and future victims (preventative) information and help, or by getting government to marginalize these problems. I remember some (women) associations campaigning/lobbying against "men's shelters", trying to get their funding cut or not allocated in the first place, or trying to get local governments to deny permits to operate such shelters. WTF.
- rectang 7y ago
  > I remember some (women) associations campaigning/lobbying against "men's shelters" Citation needed.
  - rndgermandude 7y ago
    I'd have to google, as I didn't read about it recently. So you could google yourself. Or just dismiss me as a crackpot who makes stuff up. But you might be interested to read about this lady: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erin_Pizzey https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erin_Pizzey >She is known for having started the first domestic violence shelter in the modern world, Chiswick Women's Aid, in 1971 [...] Pizzey has been the subject of death threats and boycotts because of her research into the claim that most domestic violence is reciprocal, and that women are equally capable of violence as men.
dang 7y ago
"Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html You reacted to something the commenter didn't say, and have since been perpetuating a flamewar. We don't need that. Please don't.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

kijin 7y ago

The parent said stigma (misspelled as sigma), not the original rape. Rape > social stigma == neglect by relief agencies

rectang 7y ago
> social stigma == neglect by relief agencies Still a resounding "no". Demonizing relief agencies as being as bad as societal homophobia? You honestly think relief agencies are in it for the money and are minimizing male rape?
- hulahoof 7y ago
  I personally believe that some charities / relief services in almost all areas are in it for the money. Of course, my beliefs don't amount to anything other than researching who I personally give money to, but I do not find it far-fetched to believe that some agencies act in bad faith; I have a hard time aligning with the false memory syndrome foundation for example.
  - rectang 7y ago
    Being acquainted with people who volunteer in such relief agencies, I cannot tell you how disgusted I am to see their efforts denigrated as profit driven. They are typically rape victims themselves, each with their own individual stories — not just statistical females who have experienced statistical rape. The idea that they would not sympathize with male rape victims is just... appalling. Are you saying you know such people? Name names.
    - handedness 7y ago
      This oversimplifies the situation. An NGO can be profit-driven while the actual volunteers and workers who do much good are not. Did you read the article? This is not an entirely uncommon situation, either. The corruption is often seen as a cost of doing business by interested parties with other priorities, something which all parties are usually generally aware. After a war (a scenario in which NGOs thrive) the existing social structure that has the capacity and organization to execute projects is often the winning faction, which as often as not didn't prevail by being virtuous.
    - orpheline 7y ago
      To state that some relief agencies are - I'd say success-driven rather than profit-driven - is not an attack on the people in direct contact with, and assisting, victims. There is an unavoidable gap between volunteers at the forefront of relief efforts, and the people running the agency. Like any other organization, relief agencies need funding, they need support from local government, they need positive publicity if they're to continue. The people doing those jobs are focused on those results, not the work those in the field are doing. You asked for an example. About 20 years ago, my colleagues' three-year-old daughter was kidnapped from in front of her apartment house. She was a sweet, blue-eyed, blonde-haired child, and her search became a huge media frenzy: non-stop reporting as police followed lead after lead. She started working with a local branch of a national missing children's organization. At her first meeting, the director told her that her daughter' disappearance was "the best thing that has happened to them" because the publicity pulled in so many donations. He wasn't a bad person, or incident to get daughter; but his role was making the agency successful, and he evaluated things from that standpoint. I don't think that's at all unusual for these agencies.
  - hulahoof 7y ago
    I can't reply to your comment, rectang, so I hope this will suffice. You will notice I did not call out anyone for denying help to make rape victims, merely that I believe bad actors exist in all facets of society. I by no means am putting down the hard work of the heroes who give their time to help people. I find your black and white response just as disgusting, to ignore that people can take positions of power over others and abuse them. As for naming names, I have given an example of an organisation I find abhorrent.
    - rectang 7y ago
      > I find your black and white response just as disgusting, to ignore that people can take positions of power over others and abuse them. Because the relief agencies you accuse of predation contribute more towards human suffering than rapists? Keep fighting the good fight, hulahoof!
- kijin 7y ago
  The article explicitly mentions some who are concerned that putting a spotlight on male victims will take a chunk out of their piece of the cake. If a so-called relief agency is worried more about their market share than the absolute number of people they're helping, I'm not sure whether they should be called a relief agency at all.
- manigandham 7y ago
  This is explicitly discussed in the article and even quoted by the previous comment you replied to.

rndgermandude 7y ago

For the individual victim, the rape is certainly a lot worse than what those agencies do. However, at scale, agencies that try to censor information and reports about rape/violence other than male-on-female rape/violence might do a lot of harm regardless, be it through stigma, or be it through denying victims and future victims (preventative) information and help, or by getting government to marginalize these problems. I remember some (women) associations campaigning/lobbying against "men's shelters", trying to get their funding cut or not allocated in the first place, or trying to get local governments to deny permits to operate such shelters. WTF.

rectang 7y ago
> I remember some (women) associations campaigning/lobbying against "men's shelters" Citation needed.
- rndgermandude 7y ago
  I'd have to google, as I didn't read about it recently. So you could google yourself. Or just dismiss me as a crackpot who makes stuff up. But you might be interested to read about this lady: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erin_Pizzey https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erin_Pizzey >She is known for having started the first domestic violence shelter in the modern world, Chiswick Women's Aid, in 1971 [...] Pizzey has been the subject of death threats and boycotts because of her research into the claim that most domestic violence is reciprocal, and that women are equally capable of violence as men.

dang 7y ago

"Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html You reacted to something the commenter didn't say, and have since been perpetuating a flamewar. We don't need that. Please don't.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]