Mens' Violence "Violence"

[The Willow Sword]

I post on another martial arts forum and this subject was brought up and i thought that i would cross it over to here.
this thread is posted by Laura on the deluxe martial arts forum.
About Men's Violence

In the past thirty years women have successfully organized, nationally and internationally, to move men's violence against women to the forefront of policy and health concerns. This movement is a part of a broader effort to encompass women's diverse experience and common advancement within a human rights framework.

Men's violence against women includes physical violence—both sexual and non-sexual - verbal, emotional and economic abuse. It is perpetrated through war, enslavement and genocide; in the workplace, the social structure and at large; and in intimate relationships. The focus of Men Stopping Violence is on ending the conditions that enable and perpetuate men’s violence against women with whom they are in intimate relationships.

Men hold sexist beliefs, and these beliefs fuel their choices to assault women with whom they are partnered. Cultural norms and social and institutional practices often promote and act out of those sexist beliefs, allowing men to "get away" with their assaults. Therefore, the work of Men Stopping Violence is social change.

Men's violence against women, serving to keep a specific group (men) dominant over another (women), is one manifestation of a system of hierarchical oppression that also includes racism, classism and heterosexism. As a result, men have different tools available to use against different women -- lesbians and heterosexual women, poor and middle class women, white women and women of color. While the tools may differ, the purpose—power and control—is the same. Thus, justice for women cannot be achieved through ending sexism solely, but will require ending racism, classism, heterosexism and all other forms of oppression.

do any Men or Women here have any responses to this thread?
my screen name on the deluxe forums is Lightning and Earth.
it has become a debate that i am a few others have been involved in and i thought we could discuss it here.


MRTWS

[yenhoi]

See woman.
beat with club
drag to cave
mmmm.

[Former castleva]

Notable thing.
I´ve been reading related stuff lately and just in case if you have not checked these sites already, www.nononsenseselfdefense.com and some other sites (if i can´t think of now) have valuable information on this.
Some important things to think about include that:
-Biggest amount of sexual offense cases never reach the people of authority
-Many criminals (as in sexual attacks) against women do walk away without consequences even if taken to court.
-Big amount of SO´s do personally know the victim.
-Male criminals do make claims about how "they asked for it" for their security and tend to get "under influence" or related to get out of trouble.

[relaxed]

The generalized statement "Men hold sexist beliefs...." itself is a sexist statement.

[Repulsive Monkey]

touche, I was just about to mention that. I personally dislike the whole tone of that polemic because It is written by someone who is slightly imbalanced and has some delusional and unbalanced views. It is dreadfully biased and shows little intelligence on the whole. It tries to address some real issues but in a negative and lop-sided way which unfortunately negates any good that the authour initially set out to do. I think the person ought to consider their initial ideas on the whole subject again and think in a more balanced and realistic way if they were seriously going to try and promote such a dynamic.

[The Willow Sword]

Thats uhh what i was thinking,,,,,,i think:confused:

MRTWS

[Braden]

Ottawa Citizen, Dec 4th, 2001:

"On Oct. 24, 1999, Mr. Rowe, now 56, called police and asked them to be in his home while he removed some belongings. He wanted out of his marriage and didn't want to risk conflict and/or accusations in a situation that could be hostile. Two officers stood by as he made his move. He spent the night with relatives. The next morning, he was hauled out of bed, arrested and handcuffed. His wife had complained she was assaulted [the previous night, during his move]. He spent 18 hours in jail... At the time, he told the arresting officer and the investigating detective to check with the officers who came to his home the night before. Instead, he was formally charged... His legal bill was $5,350... [T]wo weeks after the arrest, his wife approached him. He locked the doors of his vehicle and used his cell phone to call police. When they arrived, it was [Mr.] Rowe who was stretched over the hood and searched [and arrested]... These policies [the ones the police above were following] translate to zero tolerance and are responsible for channelling 120 men a month into Ottawa's Domestic Violence Court. Men on this DV court ride can't go home, even if the woman recants [eg. says she was lying], until they plead guilty..."

Ottawa Citizen, Dec 5th, 2001:

"In the back of my [an Ottawa woman's] mind there was always the thought of the telephone. All I had to do was dial those three digits (911) and claim I was the one abused, and I would win...One night I did it. I had hurt Kevin [her husband] physically and he had had enough and he wanted out. When he tried to get to the door I tipped his chair [his wheelchair; the man is confined to it due to cerebral palsy]. Then I made the call. It was pure anger. I'll show you who's in charge. While I waited I calmed down and realized what I had done. I didn't want to lose him...When police arrived they told Kevin he was under arrest. I told them...look at the evidence [his legs and back were covered in bruises and sores in various stages of healing; and he is parapalegic]. I was the one who committed assault. They said they were sorry, but it was policy. The man goes to jail."

Ottawa Citizen, Dec 6th, 2001:

"He [husband of the speaker] wouldn't unlock the door [of his bathroom, where he had gone to in an attempt to escape her during a fight]... I didn't know what to do. I called police to ask what to do [about her husband locking himself in the bathroom]. I wanted to know what were the proper steps to take. I was upset and wanted advice... A short time later, Dale [the man from the bathroom] was on his way out the door with his hands cuffed behind his back... He spent the next four days and nights in jail... When they were handcuffing him I [the wife who made the call] told them he wouldn't hurt anybody..Nobody would listen... [T]he advice from support workers..was that she should break up her marriage... They [then] said if I wasn't going to protect my child from his father [by leaving him], then the system would have to [take the child from them]...there was a restraining order in place, he couldn't go near his home or family [for four months], so couldn't parent his son. Baby sitting and day care were needed, adding up to $400 a week to their problems. Then the system shut him out of his job. He was served with a court order telling him to report to the Royal Ottawa Hospital for an assessment. He was working at that psychiatric facility; the court order was an instant job-killer... Eventually, he was persuaded to sign a peace bond, and allowed to go home..He has gone into the records as another violent male. These records now show another woman rescued... Aside from the job loss and baby sitting costs, there was a $2,000-legal bill... You know what was the worst part? It was when Dale did come back, he wouldn't fight. No matter what I said or did he just said 'Yes dear.' ... In September this year, things were back to normal in their home..[i]t was a hot evening and their balcony door was open. They were being noisy and the sound was angry. There was a knock at the door. In a flash, Dale was in handcuffs again..."

[GreyMystik]

an oft-neglected fact regarding all the "violence against women" campaigns is that the VERY SAME STUDY that established the "one woman is battered every x seconds" statistic found that men actually have a HIGHER incidence of domestic violence perpetrated against THEM. in other words, if women get battered every 6 seconds, men get battered every 5, according to this study.

"From a Darwinian perspective, Radical Feminism represents the withdrawal of certain females from the breeding population. This means that they will play no role in the future gene pool of humanity. Considering the types who have taken this path -- e.g. Steinem, Dworkin etc. -- this appears to be a quite desirable eugenic choice.
Now if only we could persuade the Radical Right to withdraw from the future gene pool, too, I would like the results even better. " :D

[The Willow Sword]

to the other thread ,,,i hope you guys dont mind.

MRTWS

[Cody]

I believe that any group or individual which is in a subordinate position can be open to abuse by members of a community or "culture", or one or more individuals, who get satisfaction from domination or sadism which can take many forms.

It often begins with a dehumanization of the victim(s), and goes on from there. It can be done out of resentment. An example of female to male abuse. A woman born into a culture where women are put down, emotionally takes charge and abuses her mentally troubled husband..... I do not go along with concentrating solely on the larger or more obvious incidences of abuse, when I believe that the problem is much more general in nature. The fact that it concentrates in certain areas does not preclude the necessity for a more general (towards humanity as a whole) approach.

While racial and sexual membership are marked examples, because they are so obvious, the problem of abuse (political, emotional, physical, legal) is just a symptom of potentials that yield both healthy and unhealthy results in the underlying human structure. Good luck to anyone who wishes to delete or restructure hierarchy on a small or large scale. I would consider the only possible outcome in current times would be the substituting of one hierarchy for another. Whatever the pecking order, an excellent architecture for expression of any abusive behavior on a small or large scale is served on a platter.

In many cases, I would say, that learning compassion takes effort. I think that says something in itself. So much effort taken to learning compassion. Doesn't seem to require much effort to learn cruelty. It springs into action. How about indifference and weakmindedness? I'm not being as clear as I would like here. sorry. In truth, the thought is not yet complete in my mind. I was tempted to delete this paragraph. I think there's a lot more to it, but I'm hitting the wall on this one.

my contribution.
Cody

[Braden]

"A woman born into a culture where women are put down, emotionally takes charge and abuses her mentally troubled husband."

Could you elaborate on what you're trying to say with this passage?

[HuangKaiVun]

When I run my kung fu classes, I'll be separating males from females.

This is less because of social issues as is it due to physiologic ones. Women's bodies move differently, have a different pain tolerance, and face different situations.

Of course, I'll be having mixed gender classes as well. But the point is that women are DIFFERENT from men and have to be trained as such.

A woman can be extremely deadly to fight against. Just ask my student, who at 5'2" and 120 lbs put a would-be 6'5" 300 lb rapist into the hospital.

[Cody]

The point is that the occurrence of abuse is based on many things, which can be overlooked when the focus is on something else. A person, who has a natural underlying penchant to be an abuser, who has either been abused or been made to feel inferior, can become an abuser later in life, and take pleasure in it. This becomes apparent most likely with a child or adult who lacks certain physical and/or emotional defenses. I am referring here, at once, to circumstantial influences combined with a major defect in the self. That is what I meant.

In addition, there are other reasons why people grow up to be less than nurturing. One is not knowing how. Here, I am not referring to an innately abusive nature, but to a person who follows previous role models. It is natural to do what you "know" or have known, and it takes effort to change that. Have you ever heard anyone say that he/she didn't want to treat the children like the parents did, and then do the same things, helplessly? That's what I'm talking about in this additional example offered here.

In a very real sense, both reflect subtly different ways of assuming a role of power, which one hadn't known before. I would not consider what I am describing in the second paragraph to be identical to the example you asked about.
I think that taking pleasure in another's misery at all, or to some extent, is a determining factor of what is being dealt with, when investigating any case of abuse. I think that this characteristic can accompany a purely dominant nature, or exist quite separately. The combo of domination and sadism, in all their forms, is a sad one.

The topic of abuse is not simply male-female or anything like that in my view. There is the circumstantial, and human nature, and the mind/spirit of each person, and how they intertwine every which way they can.

hope this is more clear. thanks for asking.

Cody

[Braden]

I think alot of what you say is very true, and brings up alot of deep and complicated issues.

To sound obtuse in attempts to be clear and concise... I think...

Communication is the most powerful tool for defining culture; Culture is the most powerful tool for defining ego-relations; ego-relations are the most powerful determinant for committing or not committing an inappropriate act. It is essential to the ego of human (except for a small minority) not to commit these acts. The ego is the self. How do you act contrary to the self? When you do not think it is the self acting. This is ego-relations. This is why I am very critical of people who communicate the attribution of a cause on other than the doer. Because it is through no other than this act that the doer is empowers to act inappropiately; through communcations transformation into culture, and culture into ego-relations.

Yes, you can find causes everywhere. And that should even inform you, and empower you to better your culture. But that is secondary to the above.

[Cody]

I find some of your terminology unfamiliar. like "ego-relations." What you seem to be describing is one's true nature, and that leads into the no thought, "no-mind," example you give.

You object to making excuses for people's behavior. It seems we agree. To give an example, insecurity does not as a matter of course cause someone to be what they aren't to begin with (mean, lying, violent). One could posit that it depends on the degree of insecurity, the degree of fear brought about. If the person is innately hyperfearful, then one can understand better, but still not justify an ugly and violently cowardly life path. What you are is what you are. Circumstance brings that out, builds on it.

Our development is affected very early by our environment, even our neurochemistry. We are programmed in many ways. Culture programs. To the degree that this is internalized, some comes to be part of you, some not. I do not believe that "Culture is the most powerful tool for defining ego-relations." The most powerful tool is what one IS. Culture can be overridden to differing degrees. If not, then you are already set up for an outside influence affecting choice by the self. You are equating self with the programming of outside influences. Citing that "How do you act contrary to the self?" when the self is buried, when you don't have enough awareness of your mind and heart, etc. It's done all the time. That's what remorse is for. It's not just to set things right outside, it's a feeling that the self has not been honored. One can live a knee-jerk response life. It is possible. It's not living, not to me anyway.

Culture is a social phenomenon into which a kernel of self is born. The self exists before culture. The culture melds with, or might just coat, the self, and so on. Our thought processes are affected by the language we speak and the significance given to things (like colors). The culture codifies the significance and the form, but it is not life in the sense of one's true nature, flying out of the womb, is. Culture has, as it were, a life of its own. I was born in America. I speak English. My ear recognizes certain tonal combinations as music more easily because that was my early experience..... My heart, mind and spirit are as free as I can achieve.

One question I have which I do not expect to be answered because the data is not there, is: what is the kernel that is a human being without this input, at the beginning? Some would answer DNA, and that is part of it. But, I want more, eventhough it won't be forthcoming in this lifetime. My answer would not be culture.

I have described how some unfortunate behavior occurs because of lack of early nurturing. This isn't fiction, and it's not making excuses. It follows that poor parenting which results from this requires re-education on a deep level. In some cases, there might be in denial of what they are doing to their kids.

Be that as it may. We are all responsible for our choices. We also need to be able to tell if the choices are ours or reflex-like responses to situations built on the foundation of the First Experience.

Cody

[Braden]

Cody

"I find some of your terminology unfamiliar."

I usually try to make it up on the fly to most clearly describe what I mean, rather than use jargon which I'm unsure people will recognize. So my ego-relations, I mean the relations between [the subject of whatever I'm talking about] and the ego.

"I do not believe that 'Culture is the most powerful tool for defining ego-relations.' The most powerful tool is what one IS."

I don't think you're disagreeing, but rather misconstruing. Honestly enough though, as it's related to what you voiced difficulty with.

I made a specific point in my post to refer to 'self' on the one-hand, and 'the relationships one has with one's sense of self' (ego-relations) on the other. Thus, you're quite right - we are what we are. But how we decide to relate various things to that self is a different matter; and of all the things which affect that matter, culture is the greatest.

"You are equating self with the programming of outside influences."

No I'm not. See above.

"'How do you act contrary to the self?' when the self is buried, when you don't have enough awareness of your mind and heart, etc. It's done all the time"

Quite right. Exactly what I said.

When you say 'the self is buried', what do you mean? It is when aspects or all of the 'true self' are not directly available to that which it is attributed, the person. Yet the person still has a subject for his actions and experiences. If the subject is not true self, then it is not the self who is acting. This is exactly what I said. The same argument can be made for your terminology 'you don't have awareness of your mind and heart.'

"That's what remorse is for."

I'm not sure this is true. Concievably, I will feel remorse for things even my true self is overtly the subject of (ie. when the attributions in the above discussion are not true). Could this be only because I am not a perfect being? Perhaps. Even if this is so, then it would still be true that remorse is not, in fact, for 'this.'

"The self exists before culture."

Which self? Self, in any sense which either one of us can communicate with language to one another, does not exist before culture.

"what is the kernel that is a human being without this input, at the beginning?"

Since beginning imposes 'time' upon the conversation, and kernel imposes 'matter', and input imposes 'plurality', you've biased yourself against ever getting a decent answer. Language itself imposes 'plurality' though, so getting around these problems is a difficult task. Maybe that's why mysticism has such a profundity of metaphor?

In Eden there was a garden and a man, and in the garden was an apple, and in the man was nothing. And the man was happy. His loving father, a sad man, told him not to eat the apple. But one day he did. And then he was eternally sad. For he woke up every morning desiring the taste of an apple.

Can you remember ever not knowing anything about something? And then trying it out one day, and from that day forward being uncomfortable without it? Maybe small things like gelling your hair, or air conditioning, or nice clothes. Or maybe sex.

Or can you remember lying down one day, when you're really tired and busy. And you just want to feel relaxed for a second. And after a while the relaxed feeling comes on, and you think this is pretty useful to you. But, like a fleck of atomic dust after the big bang precipitating matter to become a red dwarf, that relaxed feeling snowballs and under you go. Your whole way of thinking is changed, you don't remember it ever being any other way. The world around you shifts uncontrollably. Then a couple hours later you wake up.

"I have described how some unfortunate behavior occurs because of lack of early nurturing."

Have you? Causes are funny things.

What if we're walking along, and suddenly I cross the road. You shout out, "Hey! Why'd you do that?" I say, oh... because of the contractions of my leg muscles mostly. You say, no no that's not what I mean. I say, ohhhh... because of action potentials in various motor units in my... You interject, come on, you know what's not what I mean! Must have been because of increased activation in my primary motor cortex! Don't be silly! Must have been because of the propensity for negatively charged particles to move away from like-charge, and vice-versa. Come on now! Ok, must be because of Newton's laws acting on my feet and the road. Bah, you're useless, why'd you cross, come on tell me! Ok, ok, it's because there's a cake shop here. Oh... yeah but why'd that make you cross? Cause I was hungry. Why? Cause I haven't eaten. Why? Cause I woke up late for work. Why? Cause my alarm didn't work. Why? Cause the power went out. Why? Cause there was a lightning storm. Why? Cause there was a build-up of negatively charged ions in the earth.

Enough is enough, I'm sure; well enough. My point is, as I began - causes are funny things. You claim you have proved factually that unpleasant behaviors are causes by unpleasant upbringing. Well, I can claim with equal (and in most cases, far greater) factuality that they are caused by just about any manner of thing I please. What is the cause we are after?

The cause we are after, very simply put, depends entirely on what it is we're trying to go about when we ask about causes. If what we're going about is trying to determine the subject of an action, going on about inferential causes is worse than useless - but distracting. It doesn't mean they're not useful and helpfull in other situations. Worse - if my argument stands, they're counter-productive. If my argument stands, the more fuel you give someone to believe the subject of their action is not themself, the more able they'll be to do it. And my argument does seem to stand, at least with you, as you stated it independantly of me, with your own jargon - see above.

"It follows that poor parenting which results from this requires re-education on a deep level."

You cannot replace the childhood of an adult who grew up in a bad situation. It cannot be done. All you can do is appeal to their self, to which both nature and nurture ultimately are subserviant. Yes, deep level re-education is required. Of society, who has convinced us all that responsability is an illusion.

[Merryprankster]

Huang hit the nail on the head. I believe the answer to ALL of this is grounded in everybody on both sides accepting reality. Men are different from women, generally speaking. This little detail, which goes beyond T & A, so obvious for thousands of years, has been beat senseless by the proponents of radical feminism.

Once you accept that statement as a true postulate, you can go forth and explore those differences, as long as you do it without the idea that different is better or worse w/regards to your value as a human being. Now, with respect to your value as a human pack mule, that's another issue entirely :)

[The Willow Sword]

that statements such as what i posted from Erica in the deluxe MA forums,,that the views expressed by the radical feminist groups are not to educate or to inform but rather to upset ,,create disdain and site passive agressive insults to the other gender. i have never supported the feminist ideal for i believe it to be anti male ,pro female. kind of like the reverse of male chauvenism in the female relm.

Most of these women are bitter man hating dykes anyway and even if they are hetero they still look for control and put upon themselves the "Mans" role which for them is a means of control and abuse. i dont even think that they realize it ,,and even if they do they dont give a sh!t. in thier right they feel that they have a right out of some age old clause that says "well if men can do it then we can as well" i guess that goes for violence and abusive tendencies.

The insight that i try to offer in the other forum is that VIOLENCE IS VIOLENCE and is NOT gender specific. it is sad though that women take the brunt of it more than men,,but to point a finger and shake it in the face of the male populous and expect us to bow our heads in shame and cut our wangers off,,,sorry ya ya sisterhood,,that is NOT going to happen.

its amazing the discussion that i am now having with this shelia character. she has about as much sense as a gnat and yet she still cant seem to realize a few things.

MRTWS

[Xebsball]

you guys... screw the anti-men lesbian women.

I'm waiting for GDA's response to this topic.

[Ryu]

"I think that taking pleasure in another's misery at all, or to some extent, is a determining factor of what is being dealt with, when investigating any case of abuse. I think that this characteristic can accompany a purely dominant nature, or exist quite separately. The combo of domination and sadism, in all their forms, is a sad one. "

Simply beautiful. Glad this was said.

Ryu

[Ryu]

My response to the thread in question.


"By saying people put themselves in a situation that they will be attacked/ or possible attacked is wrong and blamming."


I disagree with this. The only reason I do is because this can be taken to the extreme too easily. There very well is "right" ways of being aware, knowing your environment, etc.
The lion analogy is quite silly both ways because if the person avoided the lion pit all together the "attack" is for the most part neutralized.
This is not to say victims of violence are at fault of their attacks. I very much agree with Erica that it is the ATTACKERS who should be blamed for those actions. Regardless.
Yet at the same time we live in a world where men are NOT equal. Sad as that is. People need to take responsibility for their actions. But realistically, that won't always happen.
If I am aware that there is a neo nazi bar in a particular area, and I walk in with certain clothing, attitude, that I know will get me into trouble (even though it wouldn't with just about everyone else on the planet) and they beat the living hell out of me..... well they are disgusting, they are the ones at fault for the attack, and they are the ones who are without a doubt "WRONG" for their beliefs and what they did..................... But.... I'm an idiot for not taking responsibility for my own actions. Regardless if I "should" be free to do what I want..... our world doesn't work like that. I actually feel telling women that they NEEDN'T be aware of getting drunk at frat parties, where they go at night, etc. is actually very dangerous, not to mention highly irresponsible to what is a very real evil in our world. Doesn't matter if the "lions" should have been tame. In reality they weren't.

Having said all that, I want to reinerate that I very much agree with Erica on almost all her points. The "rape culture" we hear about is NOT just in the US. You can see it in many other countries as well.
Media and movies, TV, DOES portray women in a very bad light most of the time. We have films where kidnapping, beating, tieing up, women is supposed to be seen as "funny", "cute",
"cool" or other such things. To me it's really disgusting, and is a major anger to me.
I HOPE ...... that a lot of people starty seeing that kind of thing as disrespectul and digusting.

As far as the training.... I agree for the most part again with Erica. I've got more to say, but it's late and I'm too tired
LOL

So I'll call it a night.

Ryu


__________________


I have to get to bed now. I'm tired, and my work is throwing me a going away party tomorrow.

Ryu

[Serpent]

Ryu, you're just trying to impress Erica in the hope of getting a root! ;)

Seriously, though, your post was excellent. The key point?

The world should be nice, but it ain't. If you don't take that into account then you're an idiot that will have to live with some pretty serious consequences.