3 ms·

> men were hostile to women Were they really though? I mean, yes there always were and always will be some abusive men, but men _as a group_ have been more as

> men were hostile to women Were they really though? I mean, yes there always were and always will be some abusive men, but men _as a group_ have been more associated with protecting and caring for women than being hostile to them. Until very recently in human history, women actually couldn't physically survive without men - it's only been in the past few generations that the nature of work has changed to where women could actually perform it.

KptMarchewa 3y ago
> I mean, yes there always were and always will be some abusive men, but men _as a group_ have been more associated with protecting and caring for women than being hostile to them. As much a slaveowner has been "protecting and caring" for his slaves.
- swagasaurus-rex 3y ago
  You could easily equate that statement to a “mother protecting and caring for her children” It’s pretty trite and meaningless to boil every dependent relationship into one of slavery. In the past, most women had to pick between marriage with an established man so she can have many kids starting young, versus working for herself and having no or few kids. It’s no surprise many women chose marriage.
  - jfengel 3y ago
    Comparing it to children is not better. If anything, it's worse. Women are not children. They don't want to be protected, especially when they've chosen not to be. Women don't want to lose agency in the name of being cared for. Children don't have that option, because they're not adults. Adult women want to be treated as adults, and very much resent the implication that they need protection. Especially when that comes with losing control over their own bodies.
    - swagasaurus-rex 3y ago
      As an adult you should understand the financial realities of a stay at home parent. If the breadwinner (man or woman) needs to make enough to support the kids and family. If they don't, the marriage and kids suffer. The stay at home parent (man or woman) also has duties to the kids and family and home. Otherwise the kids suffer. If either party wants to divorce for any reason, the kids suffer. That's the reality of parenthood. Protection is antiquated but it's foolhardy to think a healthy man would suppress his instinct to protect his pregnant wife. You're right though women don't need protecting all the time.
      - mrguyorama 3y ago
        >Protection is antiquated but it's foolhardy to think a healthy man would suppress his instinct to protect his pregnant wife Plenty of men beat their wives, up to and including miscarriage or death. Seriously you have an absurd notion of the realities of being a woman before like the 60s. Human men, especially when angry, are irrational beings, as all humans are, and are perfectly capable of harming those they "love".
        swagasaurus-rex 3y ago
        You weren't alive then, I don't think you know either. Painting all men as abusers is dishonest.
    - TrnsltLife 3y ago
      And yet, I don't see many women turning down decades- or life-long spousal support when they walk away from a marriage (no-fault divorce remember) that they're no longer happy with. As a population, statistically, they certainly do want to be provided for at someone else's expense.
- mihaic 3y ago
  I spotted the American! Seriously though, it does absolutely no good to anyone if you make such a snide remark. Even if you'd be right, what's to be done next from that statement?
  - KptMarchewa 3y ago
    I'm Polish.
    - mihaic 3y ago
      Sure, I also made a snide remark that didn't contribute anything to the discussion. I meant though that your concepts seem anchored in the US public debate.
mrguyorama 3y ago
In recent memory, 40% of cops ADMITTED to physical violence towards their wives. But sure, tell me that men forever were actually so nice and good to everyone and slapping your wife or threatening her harm for basic things wasn't normal, or that women had the freedom to do what they wanted like every innocent human deserves, or that there weren't explicit societal pressures to be subservient to men, not by choice. >Until very recently in human history, women actually couldn't physically survive without men - it's only been in the past few generations that the nature of work has changed to where women could actually perform it. This is just wrong. The vast majority of women are as physically capable as the vast majority of men. There are only differences in the extremes
- Valakas_ 3y ago
  Let's stop with this nonsense. Women are not inherently better people than men in any general way. That is some serious propaganda going on there. If for some reason they don't abuse others physically then they do it emotionally. However, it turns out they actually do it physically. Taken from someone else: "Men are the biggest abusers." No. In fact, women initiate domestic violence more than men.[1] “Analyzing data gathered from 11,370 respondents, researchers found that “half of [violent relationships] were reciprocally violent. In non-reciprocally violent relationships, women were the perpetrators in more that 70% of the cases.” Out of all the respondents, a quarter of the women admitted to perpetrating the domestic violence and, when the violence was reciprocal, women were often the ones to have been the first to strike. Reciprocal violence was more dangerous for the victim, both men and women, than was nonreciprocal violence. In fact, men in relationships with reciprocal violence were reportedly injured more often (25.2%) than were women in relationships with nonreciprocal violence (20.0%); this is important as violence perpetrated by women is often seen as not serious.[2] "Oh, but reciprocal violence is because women are only defending themselves against men!" Reciprocal partner violence does not appear to be only comprised of self-defensive acts of violence. Several studies have found that [in cases of reciprocal violence] men and women initiate violence against an intimate partner at approximately the same rate. "That can't be right. Everyone knows women are less violent than men." Women are at least as likely as men to kill their children—more so if one counts killings of newborns—and account for more than half of child maltreatment perpetrators.[3][4] "What about the fact that it is well known that most violent crimes are committed by men?"[5] But, whatever explains the higher levels of male violence—biology, culture or both—the indisputable fact is that it’s directed primarily at other males: in 2010, men were the victims in almost four out of five homicides [6] and almost two-thirds of robberies and non-domestic aggravated assaults [7]. Family and intimate relationships—the one area feminists often identify as a key battleground in the war on women—are also an area in which women are most likely to be violent [8], and not just in response to male aggression but toward children, elders, female relatives or partners, and non-violent men, according to a study published in the Journal of Family Violence. How will your typical new age western feminist react to this? For the most part, feminists’ reactions to reports of female violence toward men have ranged from dismissal to outright hostility. Straus [9] chronicles a troubling history of attempts to suppress research on the subject, including intimidation of heretical scholars of both sexes and tendentious interpretation of the data to portray women’s violence as defensive. In the early 1990s, when laws mandating arrest in domestic violence resulted in a spike of dual arrests and arrests of women, battered women’s advocates complained that the laws were “backfiring on victims,” claiming that women were being punished for lashing back at their abusers. Some excerpts taken from: The Surprising Truth About Women and Violence [10] Feel free to copy paste it whenever someone like the above poster posit that men are the biggest abusers. [1] https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/full/10.2105/AJPH.2005.079020 https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/full/10.2105/AJPH.2005... [2] https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1&type=pdf&doi=a48363650335daeb21844772d1dd64936277ddc8 https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1&type=pdf&d... [3] http://www.jaapl.org/content/35/1/74.full.pdf http://www.jaapl.org/content/35/1/74.full.pdf [4] http://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files http://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files /cb/cm2012.pdf#page=76 [5] http://users.soc.umn.edu/%7Euggen/Lauritsen_CRIM_09.pdf http://users.soc.umn.edu/%7Euggen/Lauritsen_CRIM_09.pdf [6] http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/offenses-known-to-law-enforcement/expanded/expanded-homicide-data http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/c... [7] http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv10.pdf http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv10.pdf [8] http://www.researchgate.net/publication/226871004_The_two_facets_of_female_violence_The_public_and_the_domestic_domains http://www.researchgate.net/publication/226871004_The_two_fa... [9] https://web.archive.org/web/20140708085504/https://www.socio.com/fam31.php https://web.archive.org/web/20140708085504/https://www.socio... [10] https://time.com/2921491/hope-solo-women-violence/ https://time.com/2921491/hope-solo-women-violence/

KptMarchewa 3y ago

> I mean, yes there always were and always will be some abusive men, but men _as a group_ have been more associated with protecting and caring for women than being hostile to them. As much a slaveowner has been "protecting and caring" for his slaves.

swagasaurus-rex 3y ago
You could easily equate that statement to a “mother protecting and caring for her children” It’s pretty trite and meaningless to boil every dependent relationship into one of slavery. In the past, most women had to pick between marriage with an established man so she can have many kids starting young, versus working for herself and having no or few kids. It’s no surprise many women chose marriage.
- jfengel 3y ago
  Comparing it to children is not better. If anything, it's worse. Women are not children. They don't want to be protected, especially when they've chosen not to be. Women don't want to lose agency in the name of being cared for. Children don't have that option, because they're not adults. Adult women want to be treated as adults, and very much resent the implication that they need protection. Especially when that comes with losing control over their own bodies.
  - swagasaurus-rex 3y ago
    As an adult you should understand the financial realities of a stay at home parent. If the breadwinner (man or woman) needs to make enough to support the kids and family. If they don't, the marriage and kids suffer. The stay at home parent (man or woman) also has duties to the kids and family and home. Otherwise the kids suffer. If either party wants to divorce for any reason, the kids suffer. That's the reality of parenthood. Protection is antiquated but it's foolhardy to think a healthy man would suppress his instinct to protect his pregnant wife. You're right though women don't need protecting all the time.
    - mrguyorama 3y ago
      >Protection is antiquated but it's foolhardy to think a healthy man would suppress his instinct to protect his pregnant wife Plenty of men beat their wives, up to and including miscarriage or death. Seriously you have an absurd notion of the realities of being a woman before like the 60s. Human men, especially when angry, are irrational beings, as all humans are, and are perfectly capable of harming those they "love".
      - swagasaurus-rex 3y ago
        You weren't alive then, I don't think you know either. Painting all men as abusers is dishonest.
  - TrnsltLife 3y ago
    And yet, I don't see many women turning down decades- or life-long spousal support when they walk away from a marriage (no-fault divorce remember) that they're no longer happy with. As a population, statistically, they certainly do want to be provided for at someone else's expense.
mihaic 3y ago
I spotted the American! Seriously though, it does absolutely no good to anyone if you make such a snide remark. Even if you'd be right, what's to be done next from that statement?
- KptMarchewa 3y ago
  I'm Polish.
  - mihaic 3y ago
    Sure, I also made a snide remark that didn't contribute anything to the discussion. I meant though that your concepts seem anchored in the US public debate.

mrguyorama 3y ago

In recent memory, 40% of cops ADMITTED to physical violence towards their wives. But sure, tell me that men forever were actually so nice and good to everyone and slapping your wife or threatening her harm for basic things wasn't normal, or that women had the freedom to do what they wanted like every innocent human deserves, or that there weren't explicit societal pressures to be subservient to men, not by choice. >Until very recently in human history, women actually couldn't physically survive without men - it's only been in the past few generations that the nature of work has changed to where women could actually perform it. This is just wrong. The vast majority of women are as physically capable as the vast majority of men. There are only differences in the extremes

Valakas_ 3y ago
Let's stop with this nonsense. Women are not inherently better people than men in any general way. That is some serious propaganda going on there. If for some reason they don't abuse others physically then they do it emotionally. However, it turns out they actually do it physically. Taken from someone else: "Men are the biggest abusers." No. In fact, women initiate domestic violence more than men.[1] “Analyzing data gathered from 11,370 respondents, researchers found that “half of [violent relationships] were reciprocally violent. In non-reciprocally violent relationships, women were the perpetrators in more that 70% of the cases.” Out of all the respondents, a quarter of the women admitted to perpetrating the domestic violence and, when the violence was reciprocal, women were often the ones to have been the first to strike. Reciprocal violence was more dangerous for the victim, both men and women, than was nonreciprocal violence. In fact, men in relationships with reciprocal violence were reportedly injured more often (25.2%) than were women in relationships with nonreciprocal violence (20.0%); this is important as violence perpetrated by women is often seen as not serious.[2] "Oh, but reciprocal violence is because women are only defending themselves against men!" Reciprocal partner violence does not appear to be only comprised of self-defensive acts of violence. Several studies have found that [in cases of reciprocal violence] men and women initiate violence against an intimate partner at approximately the same rate. "That can't be right. Everyone knows women are less violent than men." Women are at least as likely as men to kill their children—more so if one counts killings of newborns—and account for more than half of child maltreatment perpetrators.[3][4] "What about the fact that it is well known that most violent crimes are committed by men?"[5] But, whatever explains the higher levels of male violence—biology, culture or both—the indisputable fact is that it’s directed primarily at other males: in 2010, men were the victims in almost four out of five homicides [6] and almost two-thirds of robberies and non-domestic aggravated assaults [7]. Family and intimate relationships—the one area feminists often identify as a key battleground in the war on women—are also an area in which women are most likely to be violent [8], and not just in response to male aggression but toward children, elders, female relatives or partners, and non-violent men, according to a study published in the Journal of Family Violence. How will your typical new age western feminist react to this? For the most part, feminists’ reactions to reports of female violence toward men have ranged from dismissal to outright hostility. Straus [9] chronicles a troubling history of attempts to suppress research on the subject, including intimidation of heretical scholars of both sexes and tendentious interpretation of the data to portray women’s violence as defensive. In the early 1990s, when laws mandating arrest in domestic violence resulted in a spike of dual arrests and arrests of women, battered women’s advocates complained that the laws were “backfiring on victims,” claiming that women were being punished for lashing back at their abusers. Some excerpts taken from: The Surprising Truth About Women and Violence [10] Feel free to copy paste it whenever someone like the above poster posit that men are the biggest abusers. [1] https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/full/10.2105/AJPH.2005.079020 https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/full/10.2105/AJPH.2005... [2] https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1&type=pdf&doi=a48363650335daeb21844772d1dd64936277ddc8 https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1&type=pdf&d... [3] http://www.jaapl.org/content/35/1/74.full.pdf http://www.jaapl.org/content/35/1/74.full.pdf [4] http://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files http://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files /cb/cm2012.pdf#page=76 [5] http://users.soc.umn.edu/%7Euggen/Lauritsen_CRIM_09.pdf http://users.soc.umn.edu/%7Euggen/Lauritsen_CRIM_09.pdf [6] http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/offenses-known-to-law-enforcement/expanded/expanded-homicide-data http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/c... [7] http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv10.pdf http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv10.pdf [8] http://www.researchgate.net/publication/226871004_The_two_facets_of_female_violence_The_public_and_the_domestic_domains http://www.researchgate.net/publication/226871004_The_two_fa... [9] https://web.archive.org/web/20140708085504/https://www.socio.com/fam31.php https://web.archive.org/web/20140708085504/https://www.socio... [10] https://time.com/2921491/hope-solo-women-violence/ https://time.com/2921491/hope-solo-women-violence/