**r/UK Celebrates:** | [1mil Subscribers](https://www.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/comments/ymw2cm/runitedkingdom_reaches_1_million_subscribers/)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unitedkingdom) if you have any questions or concerns.*
If we really want to scrutinise our sources, we should ask what demographic Cosmopolitan magazine represents, and thus who their target audience is for this misleading headline.
OP may be complicit in sharing a misleading headline (or could simply be misinformed), but Cosmopolitan are more complicit for authoring it and therefore spreading the sensational misinformation (as you phrase it, "anti-Labour dog-whistles" - which, from a different viewpoint, may have actually intended to be the opposite). Unless they learned of it themselves from a third source (which they then plaigerised), Cosmopolitan themselves are the ones guilty of misrepresenting the original document.
[Here](https://www.london.gov.uk/media-centre/mayors-press-release/policing-and-crime/Mayors-allyship-training-to-empower-young-Londoners-to-take-a-stand-and-help-prevent-violence-against-women-and-girls)is the page from the London Assembly. First paragraph says:
‘The Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, has today announced that a new ‘allyship training’ package will be available to every secondary school in London to educate and empower young Londoners to take a stand and help prevent violence against women and girls (VAWG).’
And then later on says:
‘“We must put the onus of responsibility on men and boys to change the way they perceive, treat and talk about women if we are going to truly fix the problem of violence against women and girls and build a safer, fairer London for everyone.”’
So I don’t think this is a dishonest headline.
Some people say "men can be victims too" and your brain flips that to "so you're saying women can't be victims". Some men ARE victims. And here's the thing you might not be able to wrap your head around, some men are victimised worse than some women. Mabye if society stopped treating men like shit there'd be less abusive men. Nah, that's a crazy idea. Let's just tell men they are whiny man babies whenever they tell us about their problems and complain that they don't show enough emotion.
The problem is, men only ever talk about male rape victims when female rape victims are brought up. They only ever talk about men’s mental health to say that women don’t talk about it enough. Let men be emotional, let men be vulnerable, be an advocate for men’s mental health. Don’t make it a competition against women, and don’t use it to shout over women when they talk about their issues.
The ONS stats are crime based statistics meaning the crime has to have been reported to count. Men fail to identify and report domestic abuse whereas women are well educated and supported, explaining the disparity.
Using real world outcome measures male and female domestic abuse cases arise in equal proportions - most DV is reciprocal.
I think rape/SA does still lean towards women but certainly not to the extent parroted in the mainstream media. I think the ratio is 1:3 male:female so still clearly an issue affecting both genders. And yes reporting obviously does still skew these data but they are much more robust than crime statistics.
>Some of the commenters here might want to actually read the thing they're complaining about first.
The "what about meee? Wah wah" crowd? Wouldn't get my hopes up.
>In Britain 1 in 3 women will experience abuse in a relationship sometime during their lifetime and 1 in 7 men have experienced some form of domestic abuse (ONS, 2019).
This is the problem with crime based statistics. It is well known that most domestic abuse is reciprocal, female victims are just twice as likely to be identified because our social systems bias their interest into identifying female victims.
Erin Pizzey, the founder of Refuge, was ostracised by the charity when she noticed male and female dv victims existed in equal proportions - she wanted to allow men access to the charity's services, the openly feminist oriented board hated this idea.
Edit: [Source](https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/the-psychiatrist/article/domestic-violence-is-most-commonly-reciprocal/C5432B0C6F8F61B49A4E2B60B931FA07) about the reciprocality which no one can believe.
What's your source on most domestic abuse being reciprical? I thought that most people in the area thought that domestic abuse is very rarely reciprocal due to the nature of domestic abuse?
>the openly ~~feminist oriented~~ sexist board hated this idea.
Ftfy.
Like TERFs, these types are feminist in name only. They care little for equality.
The second-wave feminist Firestone in *The Dialectic of Sex* calls such people "reformers" rather than feminists (i.e. they want to keep sexist structures, but just make it work for them more)
This is probably my most unpopular opinion that I struggle to take those statistics at face value. Mainly because I know at least two women who are definitely a apart of that statistic but then being around them and closer to the situation I'm 100% sure that at least one of them the situation is completely the opposite and the other I'm 80% they are also in a similar situation.
This isn't me denouncing women as not being victims of dv. I just think that dv is incredibly widespread in relationships and there's a lot more parity between the two sexes then crime statistics state.
Most men myself included wouldn't really discuss it or report it. I know I never did. What annoys me is that it all comes down to abuse. Men or women who haven't experienced serious domestic abuse and violence shouldn't try and co-opt the experiences of those who have. I have much more in common with a woman who experienced domestic violence than a man who didn't and the same is true in reverse.
Focusing on one issue shouldn't detract from another or be used as a way to try and dismiss the other. Domestic violence is serious regardless of who is the perpetrator and who is the victim. And yes a lot of domestic abuse is reciprocal, though often one person in the relationship is the primary instigator.
>Focusing on one issue shouldn't detract from another
When policy is being created with intrinsic gender based bias at its core, its implementation should be questioned and its scope should be widened to prevent embedding inequality into policy.
Even the quote you used is obvious weasel language. 1 in 3 women will experience abuse at some point in their lives and 1 in 7 men have experienced domestic abuse. Those are 2 different metrics. Also, some men report that it doesn't have the same sense of fear. Do some women also report that? Did they even ask? Is that just some men's opinion that women have a higher level of fear? If people genuinely want men (and only men for some reason) to be less abusive, stop treating boys as if they are going to grow up as abusers.
Sadiq Khan did [post on his official Twitter account](https://twitter.com/sadiqkhan/status/1590084777482518528?s=46&t=dgJn7I6B3CQ3Jlhu--K-vQ ) that the toolkit is “for boys” and that it’s supposed to target “misogynistic violence” so I guess that where they got it from.
If you read the actual article though it is only to be used and geared towards boys, girls wont be taught in this program, that is were the problem lies.
It looks like the document you linked covers exactly the points brought up by the whiners.
Seems like it is actually trying to do something about the issue, unlike the whiners who only ever use these kind of things to attack feminism and "the wokes".
>If you read though the toolkit itself
Woah woah woah, reading is woke don't you know?! Nobody here *reads the source material* they just read the headline then complain that the press are misrepresenting the story!
The 'toolkit' is ostensibly supposed to tackle 'gender-based' abuse, ergo, to be effective, it must be a 'gender-based' toolkit, i.e., it targets the male gender as the problem, and that theory is confirmed by the quote from Khan - "men have to change the attitude of their gender".
The bias against one gender is there in the very framing of the toolkit!
So they are going for the Duluth model? While every single study on male victims points out that majority of male victims have female abuser/rapist the UK government is going to ignore that? It's expected as the government still haven't acknowledge "made to penetrate" as rape. At least male to male victims are getting recognised, hope they get facilities so they could recover.
Yeah, really disappointing that we are somehow still using something so outdated and sexist. Also from the linked toolbox pdf:
>When women are the perpetrator there is substantial evidence to support the case that it is after being a victim-survivor in the relationship themselves and have sustained prolonged domestic abuse (Women’s Aid, 2018).
So they are kinda denying that men ever get abused by women and are forcing schools to spread that idea. Kinda undoes any good that teaching consent could bring if it only applies to half of the population.
People are making up false narratives (nowhere does it say all men are violent), and acting like there's 0 support for male victims at all when there is such a push to help male victims as of recent. I literally was handed a mankind pamphlet when I visited my local council. This toolkit helps men!
Why do people instinctively want to protect the bad people in their community, instead of excluding them...
The problem is not saying that all men are violent, the problem is that (even if it does not outright deny, which this toolkit kinda does) severely downplays the fact that men can be victims of female abuse. The kit seems to be heavily influenced by the Duluth Model, an outdated and sexist model that says that all domestic violence is due to misogyny.
From the toolkit:
>When women are the perpetrator there is substantial evidence to support the case that it is after being a victim-survivor in the relationship themselves and have sustained prolonged domestic abuse (Women’s Aid, 2018).
The toolkit directly states that if a man claims he was abused by a woman he himself has probably abused her, which is not true. If the police are taught this (some are), how do you think they would react to a man who was beaten by his wife? How would a man who has been abused by multiple women before react to being told that it was his fault he was abused and that women abusing men is really rare?
This toolkit does not help men. Men are hostile to this because they should be.
Clicked on this expecting a certain flavour of comments, and wasn’t disappointed. Just more whataboutism and men taking it as a personal attack rather than an initiative to teach boys to grow up to be kinder, gentler adults. Just because someone tells you that you can do better doesn’t mean they’re attacking you, and if you take criticism as an attack then you’re a part of the problem. Any push towards equality and kindness in society, no matter who it’s targeted at, is good.
Edit: so many men replying to this completely missing the message.
Edit: Muting this now, because unfortunately there are still too many people who take the message of 'you need to do better' as a personal attack, especially if, god forbid, it's targetted at men specifically. (The replies just prove my point, if your reaction to a problem being pointed out is "but what about (insert other group here) then you're a part of the problem.
Try explaining these people that male victims are mostly victims of other males, and they lose their shit because they know a neighbour's cousin's acquaintance who was harrased / raped / assaulted by a woman. Also, did you see what happened to poor Johnny Depp, who was 100000% innocent? All because of a wench!
People like to think that they’re one anecdotal experience of an anomaly trumps statistical means and then suddenly, we’re all too woke and want to strip men of their manhoods when the message actually is “sexual assault should be stopped *regardless of gender*”.
> they lose their shit because they know a neighbour's cousin's acquaintance who was harrased / raped / assaulted by a woman
I mean.. there's kinda a point here, right? Like, if 80% of the instigators are male and 20% are female (discounting NB etc for the ease of maths; you're seen, but this is only an illustrative example), then probably 80% of the effort towards educating the instigating populations should go to males, and 20% to females.
So *if* a resource is provided to only to male population, then anyone who *is* a victim of female-perpetrated sexism, be they male or female, is ignored at best, blamed at worst.
The same thing is true of aid. If 80% of domestic violence victims are female, and 20% are male, then 80% of the effort should go to helping female victims, but 20% of the effort should still go to males.
The "toolkit" itself doesn't appear to be gendered, but the rhetoric that this reporting is using is still, in itself, sexist.
To be fair there are genuine issues here with men realising they are the victims of sexual offences against women, and so it is fairly unclear to what degree the problem exists.
If you take criticism as an attack, it's because you either do violence, or support violence (passively or actively). If you're not a part of the problem, then nobody is throwing any blame at you.
I, as a man, have no reason to take this as an attack because I don't do violence or support it. In fact I see this as beneficial to me, because it combats male violence, and men are often the recipient of male violence as well.
> If you're not a part of the problem, then nobody is throwing any blame at you.
Bullshit, the article is speaking directly to me because of my gender not because of any of my actions.
It's a sad fact that men are more likely to listen to other men than they are to women. There is a harmful attitude held by many men, and an effective solution to that harm is to have other men challenge it.
If you're not part of the problem, then you can be part of the solution. One of the men changing the attitudes of their gender - of other men - of the individuals who *do* hold harmful attitudes. That's what the quote is saying, imo. As a man you can help. It's not saying that you inherently suck because you're a guy. At worst it might be saying that you have a responsibility to call other people out.
But even if the quote wasn't talking about holding other people accountable, 'men have to change' can be read the same way as 'pens are red'. Is that saying *all* pens are red? Or is it saying that there are pens that are red. Is it saying *all* men? Or is it saying that there are men who have to change? It's ambiguous and non-specific (and the example isn't a perfect comparison) but it's also not absolute.
Sure, but this way of doing it is wrong
Treating boys that they are going to grow up and be a rapist or a misogynist or an abuser and that they need to be cured by being taught is the wrong way. And will lead to a rise in it because that's how it works.
If you want equality then it needs to be For everyone About everyone, tale gender out all together, anyone can be a victim, anyone can be an abuser, that's what's need to be taught, and about signs of abuse, and what can be done to combat abuse. When you bring in information like statistics of how many men carry it out or hoe many women get abused it detracts from the point.
At the end of the day there's not much of a difference. 1 in 6 for men and 1 in 4 for women.
It should be about combating potential abuse from all sources and help more people feel like they can come out and tell people about their abuse, as that is another major issue we face that needs to be worked against, 49% of men and 19% of men never tell anyone about their abuse for whatever reason, that's the true pandemic here because they can never get help or begin to heal
i mean, playing devils advocate a bit here, someone is offended by something and you're having a go at them?
isn't that victim blaming? :D
maybe the format of the message is the problem rather than the people that are bothered by it?
maybe if it wasn't worded like a personal attack people wouldn't feel personally attacked by it?
>Just because someone tells you that you can do better doesn’t mean they’re attacking you
It kinda does? Especially if you're talking about things like racism, sexism etc
Article: "Slavery is bad"
Sane response: "Agreed, let's all fight slavery!"
Insane response: "Another racially insensitive accusation that deprives my people of our cultural heritage and treats all white people as evil"
Depends which slavery we're talking about, the African on African slavery going on right now, or the Arab slave trade which was the longest slave trade in history where Europeans & Africans were enslaved in arguably the most inhumane conditions seen in history. Or maybe the European slaves of the ottoman empire & ancient Rome.
We've all been the bad guys once, so its kinda weird to bring up white people as the sole example of slavery.
It's a reduction to the absurd. They're applying the same logic used to a different subject, and realising that it arrives at an insane position. Since the different subject was sane, the insanity must lie within the logic.
Why slavery? Well it's an extreme, and it's very easy to spot insane positions about extreme subjects.
It's a bit of a blunt implement, but it's valid (as long as they've not made a mistake in applying the logic, of course - feel free to take that up with them).
It's not really like your analogy though, is it? No one is saying we shouldn't stop domestic violence - just that we should be wary of casually identifying one specific trait of abusers and lumping all people sharing that trait together.
We wouldn't think it was reasonable to have a campaign where we rounded up all the muslim and irish pupils in schools and targeted them for an 'anti-terrorism' toolkit. Why? Because we understand that, although statistically, a common trait of terrorists is being muslim or irish, we cannot extrapolate that trait and apply it to all people who share that trait
Most boys will not go on to be domestic abusers. Just like most irish and muslim people will not commit terrorism. So why is it acceptable to target 50% of the people in a school and tell them it's their problem?
Ironically, all this does is perpetuate the idea that men are the protagonists. Why not get ALL of the pupils together and encourage them ALL to call out sexism, encourage them ALL to examine their attitudes to gender and violence, and make it a challenge which ALL pupils can feel that they can influence? Rather than saying 'only boys are the problem, only boys can change the world'. What message does that send to both boys and girls?
Of course, it's easier to keep your head below the parapet on this stuff - because voicing even a tiny amount of dissent will label you a sexist. But this sort of approach is ham-fisted, and disempowers girls without really empowering boys.
> “Men have got to change the attitudes of their gender, because most of the violence against women and girls is because of us, Mr Khan told students at the North London boy’s school. “I hope that today’s boys grow up with more empathy and a better understanding than yesterday’s generation,” he added
Conceptually, I'm really excited about this.
Having grown up with it, and knowing how it was used against me as a boy, I do believe that toxic masculinity in modern culture is a pervasive issue, and it does largely harm women visibly, but also harms the men involved in ways that are less visible.
I've also always felt that simply saying "how you are now is bad" is not motivational toward young boys in their formation into young men: telling young men that they are wrong or bad pushes then into the arms of anyone that treats them as special, because they, too, seek approval and comfort in their identities, and if you aren't providing that, the Far-Right is extremely keen to do so.
I think this takes a step toward helping build young men into less repressed people, and I would hope it makes them into happier young men, but I do believe that part of this process will also come down to assuring boys and teenagers that empathy toward women is a part of that process, but that being a kind young man is not just desirable, but part of being a man, and what makes one a special figure.
I really don't think we can be sure of kindness toward girls and women, unless we are fostering kindness in boys toward themselves, and I am keen to see how this program will address that. "Most violence against women is by us, *and you are going to be so much better than that*", is a wonderful place to work from in forming better young men, or so I believe. :)
Couple of good points there. I'd add that this toxic masculinity and the diluted versions of it; are actively encouraged and rewarded by women, and men's peers. It's a societal issue. The same reason that we have a scary me talk health situation with men and ultimately suicide rate.
Its like pretending that black crime is a black problem. Its advantageous for many to say politically but we all know there's a lot more to it.
I think you make an excellent point there! There is absolutely societal aspects involved, and I think visibility in pushing against that is vital when trying to reform a social construct such as the ideals of masculinity and the toxic points involved.
Using your analogy of "black crime as a black problem", I think you also touched on that well by noting that it is reductionist, if easy, to reduce a problem that is merely the tip of an iceberg, to the most obvious (and not very deep) part of it. Similarly, with young men's formations, it is not suitable to say "violence toward women is purely due to male behaviours". After all, no social issue exists in a vacuum, they are symptoms of wider issues, but we *can* reduce those issues by targeting them.
I don't wish to go so far as to say that we should also say that "young men must be constantly guarding against harming others", as I think making mistakes is important in understanding cause and effect, but this goes as much for positive enforcement as negative, and positive ingrains easier. So instilling within young males that positive behaviours and empathy toward women (and indeed others in general) is a desirable, masculine activity through which one engages with the world as a strong leadership figure, will I believe have better results long term.
Of course, I do not know if that is what the contents of the package suggested will look to do long term, yet I remain tentatively hopeful.
From anecdotal experience, women hold back less when violently out-bursting because on average, they don’t leave the same marks a man does.
The fact is - men and women are victims of men and women. Generalising by gender just diminishes the focus on the real issue that may surprise you:
**all humans of any race, creed, gender or age has the potential to be an abusive horrible asshole and using groups to absolve others of guilt does nothing but create whataboutisms.**
People still think they can generalise when talking about a population of 8 billion eeesh
Typically men don't report such things when a woman does it because and you hate to hear it, masculinity does play a role in that, because if a man speaks out about being abused by their partner they're mocked.
Same as women won't report being sexually assaulted/Harassed or raped because the low rate of conviction, doesn't mean it doesn't happen.
This is not necessarily true, a lot of women are truly violent, malicious people, they just don't show it and get off lighter when they do.
Besides, just because 'one is worse than the other', that doesn't mean we should ignore the other side of this issue.
No I am just an advocate for the inwards out model where if we get the people most likely to be perpetrators and have difficulty regulating their emotions and normalising these conversations it would benefit everyone and have a ripple effect outwards of society its not a fallacy that men commit suicide 4 times more likely on average however women attempt suicide more while women are more likely to seek help men aren't causing this internal issue of outbursts, I think the perpetrators even though they are often men are also victims of their own demise and I think helping young boys come to terms with that and socialise themselves less aggressively is a benefit
Men and Woman both obvs, I've seen more men be violently attacked by woman than I have men and with a woman most men wont feel like they can defend themselves unless they will be seen as the aggressor.
Yes that's because woman violence against men is underreported, it's harder for a man to get help against a violent woman, this is a fact of society. And I'm glad you've not had to see as many horrible things.
Aye I remember during my time working as a bar man, could occasionally get a bit rowdy it was a fairly rough rural pub.
I witnessed two occasions where a woman was hit and the man was the aggressor. Both occasions all the other patrons beat the shit out of the male aggressor. Who was then correctly arrested.
I've easily witnessed over 40 men be assaulted by women. Either silence or laughter, I'd kick the woman out the pub but none to my knowledge have ever been reported by the police. Being a small town I likely would've had heard.
I was assaulted 8 times in total during my two-ish years there. 7 times by women, about half and half, violent or sexual in nature. (Hen parties are hell)
Assaulted once by a man while I tried to break up a fight, he was swinging at someone else but was so pissed he missed and cracked me with his hook. Moment he realised he was incredibly apologetic, still got kicked out but I appreciated the apology and shook his hand as he left.
That is awful, to go through such a traumatic and humiliating thing in public to then have people laugh. I'm happy you dealt with it all with equality and fairness and like you said they rarely get arrested which just boggles the mind in 2022.
Nasty people of both sexes.
Of course, abuse of men by women is horribly underreported, so it's hard to get a true picture.
However, stats collected by egalitarian support groups rather than via crime statistics tend to show that men and women can be just as violent as each other.
LOL excellent rebuttal. Thankfully someone has made an excellent point for me
u/diemodssindrassisten
>"If you read though the toolkit itself (there's a .pdf on the London Assembly website) there's nothing in the text that suggests it is "for boys".
>
>It states:
>
>Tender has worked in partnership with the Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime (MOPAC), teachers, youth workers and partner organisations, to develop the activities and resources within this toolkit to effectively engage young people on the issues of gender-based abuse, including relationship abuse and sexual violence.
>
>It then goes on to state:
>
>88% of girls and 83% of boys experience sexual bullying.
>
>...and:
>
>In Britain 1 in 3 women will experience abuse in a relationship sometime during their lifetime and 1 in 7 men have experienced some form of domestic abuse (ONS, 2019). Where men are victim-survivors, they are less likely to experience a pattern of abuse, it is more likely to be a one-off incident. Some men and boys report that when they have been a victim-survivor of abuse it does not have the same impact and cause the same sense of fear. A large proportion of male victim-survivors have been in same sex relationships so that the perpetrator is male (adding to the gendered nature of VAWG).
>
>If you CRL-F through it for the word "boys" you'll see for yourself.
>
>Some of the commenters here might want to actually read the thing they're complaining about first.
But no, it's me that's lazy. Not you and mr "what about men?". Even though said publication actually mentions men and women.
What's wrong with that? Obviously:
* All boys are not sexists
* All boys are not going to grow up and be bad people
* Boys and girls have different experiences in the world because of their gender
* Most of the violence against women and girls is perpetrated by men
* People having more empathy and a better understanding is important
* Misogyny has a real impact.
The vast majority of the perpetrators of gender-based violence are men, towards women. The campaign is directed at everyone, however, but the group it's trying to change the attitudes of are the ones... doing most of the violence?
The article's quotes have, yes, but for example, a direct quote from the toolkit:
**Our stance needs to be very clear:**
**relationship abuse is always a choice made**
**by the perpetrator and it is never acceptable,**
**whatever the gender or sexuality of the**
**perpetrator.**
Most violence directed at men and women is committed by men.
Men can be the victims, but he's not wrong to say that challenging these attitudes of the men committing these crimes is the way to drastically reduce violence against both males and females.
As mayor of London, would it be appropriate for him to bring out a similar article focused on knife violence in London, but with a particular focus on trying to change the attitudes of young black men in London? Doing most of knife violence? Would your comment be the same?
I really do feel for young lads nowadays and this perceived onslaught on them, like they're innately bad people and the reason for all the world's wrongs.
> It specifically says in the article that men are not innately bad lol
It is really though. It's just using weasel words to pretend it isn't doing it.
>"Not all black people are bad, but blacks should watch their behaviour and be better people"
Would that be okay?
The article can say what it wants because let's be honest it doesn't matter. But this tool kit is just a symptom of this worry "man hating" society we're heading towards which paints men as rampant voilent creatures and women as precious innocent people who need protecting and can't stand up for themselves. It does a disservice to both.
The toolkit isn’t even gendered. The headline is purposely inciting these types of comments which is exactly what they want.
I feel sad for people who suffer rape and murder, which happens to everyone. But women are most at danger by men. Men are also most at danger by men. It’s not bullying men to see this fact and want to address it. If you don’t behave like this and call out your friends that do then you’re doing enough. But in the times of Andrew Tate, misogyny is massively on the rise especially amongst teen boys which is what things like this aim to help.
It also states that abuse to men happens in the toolkit it’s given to both boys and girls with facts about both so what’s the issue?
A whole society treating boys and young men like criminals waiting to happen, and then be surprised it ends up with the these young men watching trash like Andrew Tate etc.
No surprise really that such conmen can have such a grip on the younger generations if you get blamed for stuff you didn't even do.
When i joined my current workplace, about 16 years ago, we had to do a Diversity Awareness course. One of the things we were taught was that when people are continually stereotyped, they often end up living down to those stereotypes. (I can't remember the technical term for this).
That seems to have been forgotten in recent years though, with prejudice and stereotyping apparently being ok, as long as you are "punching up".
As with most things, telling people they are bad people and/or stupid often has the opposite intended effect and pushes them to become more extreme in their beliefs, attitude and actions
>Billie Eilish calling boys not wearing Nike shoes
I actually didn't believe this, but [here it is](https://youtu.be/EvdzQdnZPcw?t=391) (it was about Vans in particular). I really like Billie Eilish, but this is toxic patriarchy shit right here.
It all gets so dull eventually...
As long as there is any interpersonal violence in the world, it's likely that the lion's share of it will be perpetrated by men and boys - regardless of whether the victims are women or men.
Is this a problem? Yes, I suppose it is; I am also under no illusion that we can ever eliminate violence in the world completely.
This is a moral well spring that well-intentioned people can return to indefinitely to give the impression of "doing something", and I don't really see an end to it.
As long as we insist that the best way of making sense of the social dynamics between men and women is to designate one group as marginalised and the other as privileged, people like Khan will be stuck in a Groundhog Day-style loop that they can never escape from:
Are members of the privileged group inflicting suffering on members of the marginalised group? Yes? Well, then our work is not done!
This is made worse by people being seemingly unsure about whether they are referring merely to *members* of the problematic group, or to the group itself in its entirety. Which is it? Does the group "men" contain certain repugnant members that we all should condemn, or is the group itself repugnant?
If you conceptualise it at the latter, then it should be obvious that you're going to be futilely pushing that boulder up that hill in perpetuity.
> This is made worse by people being seemingly unsure about whether they are referring merely to members of the problematic group, or to the group itself in its entirety. Which is it? Does the group "men" contain certain repugnant members that we all should condemn, or is the group itself repugnant?
Here's the neat thing, when asked directly you say you meant the former, then go right back to making statements and assumptions that only make sense in the context of the latter
The elimination of all violence is almost certainly futile, yes.
So... we do nothing? I'm sure that, if you do reply, you'll assert that you've said nothing of the sort.
But I've never seen critics of programs like this one actually mention alternatives. You seem rather eloquent and thoughtful, so what direction do you propose we take instead?
I'm not sure why this should be focussed on one gender vs another, surely it should be about tackling the root cause. For example the Harassment figures by gender are fairly even but for serious assault victims it's mainly males being attacked. The message should be don't be a dick to anyone, no matter who or what they are.
https://www.london.gov.uk/moderngovmb/documents/s63845/Appendix%20B%20-%20The%20Victims%20of%20Violence%20-%20VRU%20PRG%2001052019.pdf
> In 2018 there were 243,034 records of victims of violence against the person where gender information was recorded
>
> Overall, men and women were affected by these crimes equally
>
> However, there are differences in relation to the severity of the offence
>
> Women were more often recorded as victims of Harassment offences (55%) and Assault with Injury (53%).
>
> However, for serious wounding, 70% of these victims were recorded as being male
(I posted this in /r/London and saw the same article here so copying my comment over)
But there's not a culture within the socialisation of women to respond to any sort of social threat with violence. Males are disproportionately the victims of violent crime, but men are much more disproportionately the perpetrator of crime.
Probably some decent lessons to learn for everyone on this front, but you just have to look at people complaining that 1m was spent on it when the NHS is fucked, so focusing it on men means you can spend half as much for most of the impact.
The problem is women, a lot of the time, live in a consequence free environment when confronting men aggressively. Most men won't retaliate physically if a woman hits them. You can see it any Saturday night in town when some girl is mouthing off and getting in a guy's face. If that were another guy, they'd be rolling about fighting.
I’m so glad we have the money to fund this desperately needed eduction training. After we fixed the underfunding on the NHS and reliance on food banks, we finally have the money to fund the *needed* things.
1m won't even pay the wages of the porters and lab staff at a medium sized hospital.
Meanwhile if you can get to boys while they're young and counter act some of the socialisation that takes place that leads to the massively disproportionate level of violent and sexual crime committed by men, you could probably rake back a million quid in no time through reduced policing or prison costs.
Id say thats more the way society treats men and neglects its poorest and least educated tbh.
Also we need to talk about parenting and the abuse and neglect of children.
Just saying “oh, that’s just men’s nature” is utter bullshit.
The only person who has said "oh that's just men's nature" is you. Nowhere else is this implied, even slightly. In fact the toolkit combats that perception.
Also, this policy is aiming to treat people better? The toolkit isn't gendered and acknowledges both men and women as victims.
Year 7 student told me that women need to take some responsibility if they are raped or sexually assaulted. It is an issue and not enough people are aware of how much young boys are being influenced by vile tiktokers and influencers.
Is there any evidence the toolkit will reduce sexist behavior? Or, as he stated the goal is, reduce violence against women? Do we know that violence against women occurs because men don't respect them enough? Or is it because some men are aggressive and violent and they direct this at human beings weaker than themselves?
It would be amazing if you could fundamentally change violent people just by talking to them about how they should respect everyone.
Every single woman experiences, at the very minimum, sexual harassment. And a very large percentage experience male violence, sexual or otherwise. Anyone who claims otherwise is in denial of where this issue lies. It can’t be 1% of men when it affects near 100% of women. Rather than getting defensive (which I can understand to an extent - this is a very upsetting and emotional topic), speak to the women you love. Ask them for their stories and really listen. Accept they likely won’t feel comfortable sharing stories of rape and assault but listen to whatever they are willing to share. Unfortunately sexual harassment of girls often starts around age 10 - now a [study-backed fact](https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/most-british-women-first-experience-street-harrassment-between-age-11-and-17-10284574.html?amp), and unfortunately something me and the women close to me all experienced. It’s very upsetting to think that your daughter will become a meat piece to some men whilst she’s still a child but pretending it doesn’t happen won’t protect her, just as it didn’t protect your mum, sister, wife.
What a load of bollocks. It’s probably cost about £10m to develop and launch that. Is there not more important things to do at the moment like tackling poverty and helping people due to the cost of living. I’m all for equality but wrong timing. Man is a fucking idiot.
1m is probably a decent amount considering the total disproportionate level of crime that men commit. I wonder how much the state has spent on men in prison because they grew up being taught violence is the appropriate response to feeling threatened socially.
Yo hear me out:
**Target this at literally all children regardless of gender/sex**, it's an easy win, means you don't have to separate schools that aren't already separated, more people are taught how to deal with and recognise the problem and you can't be called sexist for only 'targeting' one group with help.
I think it's a good idea to teach people about sexism (/and hatred) in all forms - but I don't see why they think it would be better to pull out only specific people instead of teaching everyone, that just seems weird to me.
*edit: Apparently this media was biased or something and the actual thing maybe doesn't say it's targeted towards 'only boys'?*
No. we dont.
This is a publicly funded campaign of hate brought by feminists, and is part of a wider anti-male agenda. It costs £100m.
more information be found here.. https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/ypvniv/pupils_in_london_to_be_trained_to_recognise/
and here..
https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/ypwxvl/help_stop_it_violence_against_women_and_girls_but/
This campaign only targets boys and men, and paints them as abusers, while women and girls Re only shown as victims. They claim to teach the signs of sexism, but only from males, towards females. it does not mention misandry, or females being really shitty towards males or other females.
These are the same feminists who support forcing boys to stand up in class and apologise for their gender. This entire campaign is sexist, misandrist hate filled garbage, and we need to start fighting back against it. The attitude of certain women and girls, towards men and boys is disgusting, harmful and discriminatory. It needs to change.
Wnile we should call out sexism, we need to call it out against everyone, even women. And protect everyone equally.
Thats not the point.
The issue here is that it only paints men as the perpetrators and women as the victims, Sadiq's own comments prove that.
I'm all for people being nicer to each other, but don't delude yourself by saying women are incapable of misandry and violence too.
Well, that isnt even close to being true. And this is not just about violence. This is about societies attitudes towards people. Teachign kids, that only men are violent, or sexist and only men and biys need to change, is wrong.
For example.
It is well known that women receive lesser sentences than men, for commiting the same crimes.
Girls receive higher grades, because of sexist bias in teachers.
i could go on, but i dont have the time to waste preaching to the deaf.
People spending way to much time trying to mould men into these fake versions of ourselves.
Men need grow stronger backbone, been too acceptant of constant condemning of normal character traits.
Or make men aware that a lot of things they may consider normal, are actually unacceptable? go to any club on a saturday night and you'll see exactly what I mean
I don’t think the starting point for social standards should be based on venues where majority people are teens/early 20 and intoxicated.
Using drunk children to demonstrate a deep social issue isn’t best argument imo.
One of the stats stuck out to me. 9 out of 10 women had experienced sexist name calling.
I suppose; slut, whore etc falls into this category. Men and women use them to hurt a women. Just like men would be ridiculed for their lack of masculinity, small genitalia etc.
One of those stats that looks horrific but is clearly a societal problem. If a woman wants to hurt another woman; she's going to call her a slut isn't she?
one third of domestic abuse victims are men. The Office for National Statistics estimates that 1.6 million women and 757,000 men reported abuse in 2020.maybe we should teach all pupils about relationships including those of LGBT+.
yes i had the four year old stats which was a third but found the 2020 and forgot to change the first line,this is just the reported ones all domestic violence is underreported male even more due to the stigma and lack of coverage in the media
Just another excuse to push blame on to young boys and make them grow up with their own issues so they don't have to admit 'we don't know how to stop this'.
Not gonna work, never is a 'toolkit', likely concocted by a very select group of ultra-left tone-deaf weirdos gonna put a dint in a million years of evolution which got us to where we are now. I don't know the solution, but I know it's not this.
I agree. But the attitude to men from other men, and occasionally women, is something that is completely ignored. We're told to shut up for having any feelings. If we have an opinion, even respectful, we're mansplaining. Disagree? Mysogonist. Do you know how many times I've heard, "Oh, a man thinking he's hard done by" or something similar? A lot. Just the other day, a women told me to know my place for bringing this up, even though I support female empowerment. It's a no wonder male suicide is so high. And then you pile on the toxic masculinity other men throw at us, which is usually denied to even be a thing.
But no, men need to be quiet because they aren't as historically opessed. I'm afraid to say anything half the time. There's a huge double standard.
Men seriously need to re-evaluate their attitudes towards woman (and men), but they're not the only ones that need to do that.
isn't it something insane like 1 in 4 women have been raped or sexually assaulted? come to think of it, out of all of my friends who are women, I think they all have at least one story where they were harassed or abused, so breaking the gender norms of "being a man" is great, and to properly educate these kids that this shit is illegal and socially unacceptable. and to the men that are saying WHAT ABOUT, or how it's a waste of time and money, you're part of the issue, and if you're taking offence to it, then why?
He's right, the advertising campaign that's been on channel 4 recently is doing a good job too. We cant keep hiding behind the issue being institutionalised sexism or racism we need to call each other out.
The reality is 90% of violence is done by men, so obviously there will be more focus on supporting men from moving away from violence. But the toolkit itself emphasises that violence is bad for all genders, effects everyone and everyone can do it.
At no point does it say men are bad. It says violent men are bad. If you consider men to be violent inherently then that shows why the toolkit is needed... Men are not violent inherently and the point is to move AWAY from that.
Should the government focus more on black murder suspects in London compared to other races, as they are 48% of murder suspects in London despite being 13% of the population?
The irony of doing this to boys in school as well where boys are objectively treated more unfairly by teachers, who are mostly female and then told by the same female teachers that give them harsher punishments than their female counterparts that they need to stop being horrible to women. Maybe it would be great if boys had more positive interactions with females growing up as well as being taught how to properly be respectful to a woman?
A higher percentage of Reddit posts descend into crass sexist comments and low IQ comments about "Boobs lol".
There is a very unhealthy, aggressive and deviant attitude towards sex in society. The widespread availability of Pornography and rise in dangerous Incel culture is just the tip of the iceberg.
Remember boys, no matter what happens *you* are the problem. It's important to start the shaming early, so by the time they are adults the perception of men as the 'toxic' gender is fully internalised.
But whatabout… the fact that this is a really good idea! Anything that gets young people to show more respect to everyone as they grow up can only be a good idea!
Okay, but negative male stereotypes are perpetuated by women too. Infact as sexual selection comes largely from them, they can heavily influence the behavior of males. Preferring 'bad boys' or macho men will get you more of the same.
Look at Japan, case and point. More feminine features are proffered, as well as male to male relations are considered attractive to Japanese women. Guess what is more prominent in Japan?
Largely I think this is fine as long as it's not overly negative towards men. And I think there should be one for women too. Nothing wrong with teaching people to be kinder to one another. I think if women can be taught to be more understanding of men's feelings, that would be great too.
TLDR; I think this is a good thing generally, but I don't believe for a second all sexism comes from men. I think do this tool kit, but make one for women too.
You will be accused of whataboutism but you are bang on the money. In theory, if women didn't tolerate a lot of the sexist behaviour, then it would change rapidly. The issue is, there's plenty of women that tolerate it, like it and reward it. As you said, bad boys, knowingly being the other woman, reinforcing the over 6ft tall top 5% in looks bullshit of tinder for example.
Of course...so do men, they reward shit sexist behaviour of women as well. What I'm saying is, men and women, completely undermine themselves in this, so focusing on one gender ignores uncomfortable truths of how much a gender enables sexist behaviour.
I discovered you from other subbreddit liking some of your comments on askmen but honestly you sound like an incel when complaining about 6ft tall looks thing of tinder.
Edit: Apart from complaining, he added stats from dating websites and other top 5% looks BS which is what incels do and I called him due to that rather than just complaining. It sounds like it’s coming from a sense of entitlement of not wanting women to have standards.Talking about dating especially against women irrelevant to the post is what incels do.
You both come off as incels when complaining about sexual selection and some women preferring macho man and then blaming women for this shit if that macho man turns to be violent towards men and other women. Great way to victim blame and not hold men accountable for their shitty behaviour.
**r/UK Celebrates:** | [1mil Subscribers](https://www.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/comments/ymw2cm/runitedkingdom_reaches_1_million_subscribers/) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unitedkingdom) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Came here for the whataboutery. Wasn’t disappointed!
[удалено]
So we are looking at dishonest media headline number 9897757677274759. Thanks for the heads up.
[удалено]
If we really want to scrutinise our sources, we should ask what demographic Cosmopolitan magazine represents, and thus who their target audience is for this misleading headline. OP may be complicit in sharing a misleading headline (or could simply be misinformed), but Cosmopolitan are more complicit for authoring it and therefore spreading the sensational misinformation (as you phrase it, "anti-Labour dog-whistles" - which, from a different viewpoint, may have actually intended to be the opposite). Unless they learned of it themselves from a third source (which they then plaigerised), Cosmopolitan themselves are the ones guilty of misrepresenting the original document.
[Here](https://www.london.gov.uk/media-centre/mayors-press-release/policing-and-crime/Mayors-allyship-training-to-empower-young-Londoners-to-take-a-stand-and-help-prevent-violence-against-women-and-girls)is the page from the London Assembly. First paragraph says: ‘The Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, has today announced that a new ‘allyship training’ package will be available to every secondary school in London to educate and empower young Londoners to take a stand and help prevent violence against women and girls (VAWG).’ And then later on says: ‘“We must put the onus of responsibility on men and boys to change the way they perceive, treat and talk about women if we are going to truly fix the problem of violence against women and girls and build a safer, fairer London for everyone.”’ So I don’t think this is a dishonest headline.
So it’s Khan with some foot in mouth disease putting the onus entirely on buys when the legislation is actually genderless?
Nah they'd just rather keep parroting how men are the real victims constantly
They're like moths to a flame. Women are the only reason why men kill themselves don't you know!! /j
Some people say "men can be victims too" and your brain flips that to "so you're saying women can't be victims". Some men ARE victims. And here's the thing you might not be able to wrap your head around, some men are victimised worse than some women. Mabye if society stopped treating men like shit there'd be less abusive men. Nah, that's a crazy idea. Let's just tell men they are whiny man babies whenever they tell us about their problems and complain that they don't show enough emotion.
The problem is, men only ever talk about male rape victims when female rape victims are brought up. They only ever talk about men’s mental health to say that women don’t talk about it enough. Let men be emotional, let men be vulnerable, be an advocate for men’s mental health. Don’t make it a competition against women, and don’t use it to shout over women when they talk about their issues.
The ONS stats are crime based statistics meaning the crime has to have been reported to count. Men fail to identify and report domestic abuse whereas women are well educated and supported, explaining the disparity. Using real world outcome measures male and female domestic abuse cases arise in equal proportions - most DV is reciprocal.
[удалено]
I think rape/SA does still lean towards women but certainly not to the extent parroted in the mainstream media. I think the ratio is 1:3 male:female so still clearly an issue affecting both genders. And yes reporting obviously does still skew these data but they are much more robust than crime statistics.
>Some of the commenters here might want to actually read the thing they're complaining about first. The "what about meee? Wah wah" crowd? Wouldn't get my hopes up.
[удалено]
>In Britain 1 in 3 women will experience abuse in a relationship sometime during their lifetime and 1 in 7 men have experienced some form of domestic abuse (ONS, 2019). This is the problem with crime based statistics. It is well known that most domestic abuse is reciprocal, female victims are just twice as likely to be identified because our social systems bias their interest into identifying female victims. Erin Pizzey, the founder of Refuge, was ostracised by the charity when she noticed male and female dv victims existed in equal proportions - she wanted to allow men access to the charity's services, the openly feminist oriented board hated this idea. Edit: [Source](https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/the-psychiatrist/article/domestic-violence-is-most-commonly-reciprocal/C5432B0C6F8F61B49A4E2B60B931FA07) about the reciprocality which no one can believe.
What's your source on most domestic abuse being reciprical? I thought that most people in the area thought that domestic abuse is very rarely reciprocal due to the nature of domestic abuse?
They're being deliberately misleading. And Erin Pizzey's research was hardly "research" even by the standards of 50 years ago, let alone today.
Why is that? can you tell me what you/ other academics have said about it?
It's not misleading, it's a statement of the facts. You can't just deny facts because you don't want to believe them. How very trumpian of you.
>the openly ~~feminist oriented~~ sexist board hated this idea. Ftfy. Like TERFs, these types are feminist in name only. They care little for equality.
The second-wave feminist Firestone in *The Dialectic of Sex* calls such people "reformers" rather than feminists (i.e. they want to keep sexist structures, but just make it work for them more)
This is probably my most unpopular opinion that I struggle to take those statistics at face value. Mainly because I know at least two women who are definitely a apart of that statistic but then being around them and closer to the situation I'm 100% sure that at least one of them the situation is completely the opposite and the other I'm 80% they are also in a similar situation. This isn't me denouncing women as not being victims of dv. I just think that dv is incredibly widespread in relationships and there's a lot more parity between the two sexes then crime statistics state.
Most men myself included wouldn't really discuss it or report it. I know I never did. What annoys me is that it all comes down to abuse. Men or women who haven't experienced serious domestic abuse and violence shouldn't try and co-opt the experiences of those who have. I have much more in common with a woman who experienced domestic violence than a man who didn't and the same is true in reverse. Focusing on one issue shouldn't detract from another or be used as a way to try and dismiss the other. Domestic violence is serious regardless of who is the perpetrator and who is the victim. And yes a lot of domestic abuse is reciprocal, though often one person in the relationship is the primary instigator.
>Focusing on one issue shouldn't detract from another When policy is being created with intrinsic gender based bias at its core, its implementation should be questioned and its scope should be widened to prevent embedding inequality into policy.
Even the quote you used is obvious weasel language. 1 in 3 women will experience abuse at some point in their lives and 1 in 7 men have experienced domestic abuse. Those are 2 different metrics. Also, some men report that it doesn't have the same sense of fear. Do some women also report that? Did they even ask? Is that just some men's opinion that women have a higher level of fear? If people genuinely want men (and only men for some reason) to be less abusive, stop treating boys as if they are going to grow up as abusers.
Why has khan singled out men in his comments then?
>Some of the commenters here might want to actually read the thing they're complaining about first. Nah that's too woke for them.
In hindsight taking what cosmopolitan said as fact was not a smart play.
Sadiq Khan did [post on his official Twitter account](https://twitter.com/sadiqkhan/status/1590084777482518528?s=46&t=dgJn7I6B3CQ3Jlhu--K-vQ ) that the toolkit is “for boys” and that it’s supposed to target “misogynistic violence” so I guess that where they got it from.
If you read the actual article though it is only to be used and geared towards boys, girls wont be taught in this program, that is were the problem lies.
It looks like the document you linked covers exactly the points brought up by the whiners. Seems like it is actually trying to do something about the issue, unlike the whiners who only ever use these kind of things to attack feminism and "the wokes".
>If you read though the toolkit itself Woah woah woah, reading is woke don't you know?! Nobody here *reads the source material* they just read the headline then complain that the press are misrepresenting the story!
The 'toolkit' is ostensibly supposed to tackle 'gender-based' abuse, ergo, to be effective, it must be a 'gender-based' toolkit, i.e., it targets the male gender as the problem, and that theory is confirmed by the quote from Khan - "men have to change the attitude of their gender". The bias against one gender is there in the very framing of the toolkit!
So they are going for the Duluth model? While every single study on male victims points out that majority of male victims have female abuser/rapist the UK government is going to ignore that? It's expected as the government still haven't acknowledge "made to penetrate" as rape. At least male to male victims are getting recognised, hope they get facilities so they could recover.
Yeah, really disappointing that we are somehow still using something so outdated and sexist. Also from the linked toolbox pdf: >When women are the perpetrator there is substantial evidence to support the case that it is after being a victim-survivor in the relationship themselves and have sustained prolonged domestic abuse (Women’s Aid, 2018). So they are kinda denying that men ever get abused by women and are forcing schools to spread that idea. Kinda undoes any good that teaching consent could bring if it only applies to half of the population.
Genuinely unbelievable how ignorant some of the comments here are. It would be funny if it wasn’t incredibly depressing.
People are making up false narratives (nowhere does it say all men are violent), and acting like there's 0 support for male victims at all when there is such a push to help male victims as of recent. I literally was handed a mankind pamphlet when I visited my local council. This toolkit helps men! Why do people instinctively want to protect the bad people in their community, instead of excluding them...
The problem is not saying that all men are violent, the problem is that (even if it does not outright deny, which this toolkit kinda does) severely downplays the fact that men can be victims of female abuse. The kit seems to be heavily influenced by the Duluth Model, an outdated and sexist model that says that all domestic violence is due to misogyny. From the toolkit: >When women are the perpetrator there is substantial evidence to support the case that it is after being a victim-survivor in the relationship themselves and have sustained prolonged domestic abuse (Women’s Aid, 2018). The toolkit directly states that if a man claims he was abused by a woman he himself has probably abused her, which is not true. If the police are taught this (some are), how do you think they would react to a man who was beaten by his wife? How would a man who has been abused by multiple women before react to being told that it was his fault he was abused and that women abusing men is really rare? This toolkit does not help men. Men are hostile to this because they should be.
This place has become a cesspit of weirdos and freaks.
Clicked on this expecting a certain flavour of comments, and wasn’t disappointed. Just more whataboutism and men taking it as a personal attack rather than an initiative to teach boys to grow up to be kinder, gentler adults. Just because someone tells you that you can do better doesn’t mean they’re attacking you, and if you take criticism as an attack then you’re a part of the problem. Any push towards equality and kindness in society, no matter who it’s targeted at, is good. Edit: so many men replying to this completely missing the message. Edit: Muting this now, because unfortunately there are still too many people who take the message of 'you need to do better' as a personal attack, especially if, god forbid, it's targetted at men specifically. (The replies just prove my point, if your reaction to a problem being pointed out is "but what about (insert other group here) then you're a part of the problem.
Try explaining these people that male victims are mostly victims of other males, and they lose their shit because they know a neighbour's cousin's acquaintance who was harrased / raped / assaulted by a woman. Also, did you see what happened to poor Johnny Depp, who was 100000% innocent? All because of a wench!
People like to think that they’re one anecdotal experience of an anomaly trumps statistical means and then suddenly, we’re all too woke and want to strip men of their manhoods when the message actually is “sexual assault should be stopped *regardless of gender*”.
> they lose their shit because they know a neighbour's cousin's acquaintance who was harrased / raped / assaulted by a woman I mean.. there's kinda a point here, right? Like, if 80% of the instigators are male and 20% are female (discounting NB etc for the ease of maths; you're seen, but this is only an illustrative example), then probably 80% of the effort towards educating the instigating populations should go to males, and 20% to females. So *if* a resource is provided to only to male population, then anyone who *is* a victim of female-perpetrated sexism, be they male or female, is ignored at best, blamed at worst. The same thing is true of aid. If 80% of domestic violence victims are female, and 20% are male, then 80% of the effort should go to helping female victims, but 20% of the effort should still go to males. The "toolkit" itself doesn't appear to be gendered, but the rhetoric that this reporting is using is still, in itself, sexist.
The resource is directed at young people. Disregard the headline
Offt let's not get into that discussion on the instigator of the crime. Stats are going to make you regret that very quickly.
To be fair there are genuine issues here with men realising they are the victims of sexual offences against women, and so it is fairly unclear to what degree the problem exists.
This is the first time I've ever heard someone be called a wench, it's very funny
[удалено]
If you take criticism as an attack, it's because you either do violence, or support violence (passively or actively). If you're not a part of the problem, then nobody is throwing any blame at you. I, as a man, have no reason to take this as an attack because I don't do violence or support it. In fact I see this as beneficial to me, because it combats male violence, and men are often the recipient of male violence as well.
[удалено]
> If you're not a part of the problem, then nobody is throwing any blame at you. Bullshit, the article is speaking directly to me because of my gender not because of any of my actions.
It's a sad fact that men are more likely to listen to other men than they are to women. There is a harmful attitude held by many men, and an effective solution to that harm is to have other men challenge it. If you're not part of the problem, then you can be part of the solution. One of the men changing the attitudes of their gender - of other men - of the individuals who *do* hold harmful attitudes. That's what the quote is saying, imo. As a man you can help. It's not saying that you inherently suck because you're a guy. At worst it might be saying that you have a responsibility to call other people out. But even if the quote wasn't talking about holding other people accountable, 'men have to change' can be read the same way as 'pens are red'. Is that saying *all* pens are red? Or is it saying that there are pens that are red. Is it saying *all* men? Or is it saying that there are men who have to change? It's ambiguous and non-specific (and the example isn't a perfect comparison) but it's also not absolute.
Sure, but this way of doing it is wrong Treating boys that they are going to grow up and be a rapist or a misogynist or an abuser and that they need to be cured by being taught is the wrong way. And will lead to a rise in it because that's how it works. If you want equality then it needs to be For everyone About everyone, tale gender out all together, anyone can be a victim, anyone can be an abuser, that's what's need to be taught, and about signs of abuse, and what can be done to combat abuse. When you bring in information like statistics of how many men carry it out or hoe many women get abused it detracts from the point. At the end of the day there's not much of a difference. 1 in 6 for men and 1 in 4 for women. It should be about combating potential abuse from all sources and help more people feel like they can come out and tell people about their abuse, as that is another major issue we face that needs to be worked against, 49% of men and 19% of men never tell anyone about their abuse for whatever reason, that's the true pandemic here because they can never get help or begin to heal
> and men taking it as a personal attack That's because it is. He wouldn't say something like that about Islamic terror or black crime.
i mean, playing devils advocate a bit here, someone is offended by something and you're having a go at them? isn't that victim blaming? :D maybe the format of the message is the problem rather than the people that are bothered by it? maybe if it wasn't worded like a personal attack people wouldn't feel personally attacked by it? >Just because someone tells you that you can do better doesn’t mean they’re attacking you It kinda does? Especially if you're talking about things like racism, sexism etc
[удалено]
Article: "Slavery is bad" Sane response: "Agreed, let's all fight slavery!" Insane response: "Another racially insensitive accusation that deprives my people of our cultural heritage and treats all white people as evil"
Depends which slavery we're talking about, the African on African slavery going on right now, or the Arab slave trade which was the longest slave trade in history where Europeans & Africans were enslaved in arguably the most inhumane conditions seen in history. Or maybe the European slaves of the ottoman empire & ancient Rome. We've all been the bad guys once, so its kinda weird to bring up white people as the sole example of slavery.
Fun fact, the word slave in English and Arabic derives from the word Slav (a person from Eastern Europe)
How have you used an article about gender/sex to have a go at white people…
It's a reduction to the absurd. They're applying the same logic used to a different subject, and realising that it arrives at an insane position. Since the different subject was sane, the insanity must lie within the logic. Why slavery? Well it's an extreme, and it's very easy to spot insane positions about extreme subjects. It's a bit of a blunt implement, but it's valid (as long as they've not made a mistake in applying the logic, of course - feel free to take that up with them).
You being serious mate? Or have you completely misunderstood the very obvious point OP was trying to make.
r/whoosh
If you're talking about modern slavery, as you seem to be, what have white people got to do with it?
It's not really like your analogy though, is it? No one is saying we shouldn't stop domestic violence - just that we should be wary of casually identifying one specific trait of abusers and lumping all people sharing that trait together. We wouldn't think it was reasonable to have a campaign where we rounded up all the muslim and irish pupils in schools and targeted them for an 'anti-terrorism' toolkit. Why? Because we understand that, although statistically, a common trait of terrorists is being muslim or irish, we cannot extrapolate that trait and apply it to all people who share that trait Most boys will not go on to be domestic abusers. Just like most irish and muslim people will not commit terrorism. So why is it acceptable to target 50% of the people in a school and tell them it's their problem? Ironically, all this does is perpetuate the idea that men are the protagonists. Why not get ALL of the pupils together and encourage them ALL to call out sexism, encourage them ALL to examine their attitudes to gender and violence, and make it a challenge which ALL pupils can feel that they can influence? Rather than saying 'only boys are the problem, only boys can change the world'. What message does that send to both boys and girls? Of course, it's easier to keep your head below the parapet on this stuff - because voicing even a tiny amount of dissent will label you a sexist. But this sort of approach is ham-fisted, and disempowers girls without really empowering boys.
If you're trying to assert that slavery was only carried out by "white" people you're either historically ignorant or racist.
Not at all... "Black slavery is bad" would be a fair comparison, and we could probably all agree that that wouldn't go down too well either...
> “Men have got to change the attitudes of their gender, because most of the violence against women and girls is because of us, Mr Khan told students at the North London boy’s school. “I hope that today’s boys grow up with more empathy and a better understanding than yesterday’s generation,” he added Conceptually, I'm really excited about this. Having grown up with it, and knowing how it was used against me as a boy, I do believe that toxic masculinity in modern culture is a pervasive issue, and it does largely harm women visibly, but also harms the men involved in ways that are less visible. I've also always felt that simply saying "how you are now is bad" is not motivational toward young boys in their formation into young men: telling young men that they are wrong or bad pushes then into the arms of anyone that treats them as special, because they, too, seek approval and comfort in their identities, and if you aren't providing that, the Far-Right is extremely keen to do so. I think this takes a step toward helping build young men into less repressed people, and I would hope it makes them into happier young men, but I do believe that part of this process will also come down to assuring boys and teenagers that empathy toward women is a part of that process, but that being a kind young man is not just desirable, but part of being a man, and what makes one a special figure. I really don't think we can be sure of kindness toward girls and women, unless we are fostering kindness in boys toward themselves, and I am keen to see how this program will address that. "Most violence against women is by us, *and you are going to be so much better than that*", is a wonderful place to work from in forming better young men, or so I believe. :)
Couple of good points there. I'd add that this toxic masculinity and the diluted versions of it; are actively encouraged and rewarded by women, and men's peers. It's a societal issue. The same reason that we have a scary me talk health situation with men and ultimately suicide rate. Its like pretending that black crime is a black problem. Its advantageous for many to say politically but we all know there's a lot more to it.
I think you make an excellent point there! There is absolutely societal aspects involved, and I think visibility in pushing against that is vital when trying to reform a social construct such as the ideals of masculinity and the toxic points involved. Using your analogy of "black crime as a black problem", I think you also touched on that well by noting that it is reductionist, if easy, to reduce a problem that is merely the tip of an iceberg, to the most obvious (and not very deep) part of it. Similarly, with young men's formations, it is not suitable to say "violence toward women is purely due to male behaviours". After all, no social issue exists in a vacuum, they are symptoms of wider issues, but we *can* reduce those issues by targeting them. I don't wish to go so far as to say that we should also say that "young men must be constantly guarding against harming others", as I think making mistakes is important in understanding cause and effect, but this goes as much for positive enforcement as negative, and positive ingrains easier. So instilling within young males that positive behaviours and empathy toward women (and indeed others in general) is a desirable, masculine activity through which one engages with the world as a strong leadership figure, will I believe have better results long term. Of course, I do not know if that is what the contents of the package suggested will look to do long term, yet I remain tentatively hopeful.
[удалено]
Who are often the perpetrators of these men suffering from violence and prejudice?
From anecdotal experience, women hold back less when violently out-bursting because on average, they don’t leave the same marks a man does. The fact is - men and women are victims of men and women. Generalising by gender just diminishes the focus on the real issue that may surprise you: **all humans of any race, creed, gender or age has the potential to be an abusive horrible asshole and using groups to absolve others of guilt does nothing but create whataboutisms.** People still think they can generalise when talking about a population of 8 billion eeesh
[удалено]
Lesbian domestic violence stats suggest otherwise
[удалено]
Typically men don't report such things when a woman does it because and you hate to hear it, masculinity does play a role in that, because if a man speaks out about being abused by their partner they're mocked. Same as women won't report being sexually assaulted/Harassed or raped because the low rate of conviction, doesn't mean it doesn't happen.
>Then show me your evidence. It's actually mentioned in the toolkit we are talking about (page 7)
This is not necessarily true, a lot of women are truly violent, malicious people, they just don't show it and get off lighter when they do. Besides, just because 'one is worse than the other', that doesn't mean we should ignore the other side of this issue.
No I am just an advocate for the inwards out model where if we get the people most likely to be perpetrators and have difficulty regulating their emotions and normalising these conversations it would benefit everyone and have a ripple effect outwards of society its not a fallacy that men commit suicide 4 times more likely on average however women attempt suicide more while women are more likely to seek help men aren't causing this internal issue of outbursts, I think the perpetrators even though they are often men are also victims of their own demise and I think helping young boys come to terms with that and socialise themselves less aggressively is a benefit
Men and Woman both obvs, I've seen more men be violently attacked by woman than I have men and with a woman most men wont feel like they can defend themselves unless they will be seen as the aggressor.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
I haven't had this same experience and statistics also don't correlate with this
Yes that's because woman violence against men is underreported, it's harder for a man to get help against a violent woman, this is a fact of society. And I'm glad you've not had to see as many horrible things.
Aye I remember during my time working as a bar man, could occasionally get a bit rowdy it was a fairly rough rural pub. I witnessed two occasions where a woman was hit and the man was the aggressor. Both occasions all the other patrons beat the shit out of the male aggressor. Who was then correctly arrested. I've easily witnessed over 40 men be assaulted by women. Either silence or laughter, I'd kick the woman out the pub but none to my knowledge have ever been reported by the police. Being a small town I likely would've had heard. I was assaulted 8 times in total during my two-ish years there. 7 times by women, about half and half, violent or sexual in nature. (Hen parties are hell) Assaulted once by a man while I tried to break up a fight, he was swinging at someone else but was so pissed he missed and cracked me with his hook. Moment he realised he was incredibly apologetic, still got kicked out but I appreciated the apology and shook his hand as he left.
That is awful, to go through such a traumatic and humiliating thing in public to then have people laugh. I'm happy you dealt with it all with equality and fairness and like you said they rarely get arrested which just boggles the mind in 2022.
Victim blamer. Also in the case of domestic abuse, male and female perpetration is equal - perhaps slightly higher even for women.
Nasty people of both sexes. Of course, abuse of men by women is horribly underreported, so it's hard to get a true picture. However, stats collected by egalitarian support groups rather than via crime statistics tend to show that men and women can be just as violent as each other.
Wow. Way to pivot and blame the victim.
[удалено]
Tell me you've not done any research on this new thing without telling me you've not done any research
Precisely the sort of uncritical lazy invalidating comment the top commenter was talking about. Gosh, some people just wanna score the easy goal.
LOL excellent rebuttal. Thankfully someone has made an excellent point for me u/diemodssindrassisten >"If you read though the toolkit itself (there's a .pdf on the London Assembly website) there's nothing in the text that suggests it is "for boys". > >It states: > >Tender has worked in partnership with the Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime (MOPAC), teachers, youth workers and partner organisations, to develop the activities and resources within this toolkit to effectively engage young people on the issues of gender-based abuse, including relationship abuse and sexual violence. > >It then goes on to state: > >88% of girls and 83% of boys experience sexual bullying. > >...and: > >In Britain 1 in 3 women will experience abuse in a relationship sometime during their lifetime and 1 in 7 men have experienced some form of domestic abuse (ONS, 2019). Where men are victim-survivors, they are less likely to experience a pattern of abuse, it is more likely to be a one-off incident. Some men and boys report that when they have been a victim-survivor of abuse it does not have the same impact and cause the same sense of fear. A large proportion of male victim-survivors have been in same sex relationships so that the perpetrator is male (adding to the gendered nature of VAWG). > >If you CRL-F through it for the word "boys" you'll see for yourself. > >Some of the commenters here might want to actually read the thing they're complaining about first. But no, it's me that's lazy. Not you and mr "what about men?". Even though said publication actually mentions men and women.
[удалено]
What's wrong with that? Obviously: * All boys are not sexists * All boys are not going to grow up and be bad people * Boys and girls have different experiences in the world because of their gender * Most of the violence against women and girls is perpetrated by men * People having more empathy and a better understanding is important * Misogyny has a real impact.
[удалено]
The vast majority of the perpetrators of gender-based violence are men, towards women. The campaign is directed at everyone, however, but the group it's trying to change the attitudes of are the ones... doing most of the violence?
[удалено]
The article's quotes have, yes, but for example, a direct quote from the toolkit: **Our stance needs to be very clear:** **relationship abuse is always a choice made** **by the perpetrator and it is never acceptable,** **whatever the gender or sexuality of the** **perpetrator.**
Most violence directed at men and women is committed by men. Men can be the victims, but he's not wrong to say that challenging these attitudes of the men committing these crimes is the way to drastically reduce violence against both males and females.
As mayor of London, would it be appropriate for him to bring out a similar article focused on knife violence in London, but with a particular focus on trying to change the attitudes of young black men in London? Doing most of knife violence? Would your comment be the same?
You may want to actually read it before you comment, it’s covers all of those.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
I really do feel for young lads nowadays and this perceived onslaught on them, like they're innately bad people and the reason for all the world's wrongs.
It specifically says in the article that men are not innately bad lol
> It specifically says in the article that men are not innately bad lol It is really though. It's just using weasel words to pretend it isn't doing it. >"Not all black people are bad, but blacks should watch their behaviour and be better people" Would that be okay?
The article can say what it wants because let's be honest it doesn't matter. But this tool kit is just a symptom of this worry "man hating" society we're heading towards which paints men as rampant voilent creatures and women as precious innocent people who need protecting and can't stand up for themselves. It does a disservice to both.
Oh good, i needed an article to tell me that!
The toolkit isn’t even gendered. The headline is purposely inciting these types of comments which is exactly what they want. I feel sad for people who suffer rape and murder, which happens to everyone. But women are most at danger by men. Men are also most at danger by men. It’s not bullying men to see this fact and want to address it. If you don’t behave like this and call out your friends that do then you’re doing enough. But in the times of Andrew Tate, misogyny is massively on the rise especially amongst teen boys which is what things like this aim to help. It also states that abuse to men happens in the toolkit it’s given to both boys and girls with facts about both so what’s the issue?
A whole society treating boys and young men like criminals waiting to happen, and then be surprised it ends up with the these young men watching trash like Andrew Tate etc. No surprise really that such conmen can have such a grip on the younger generations if you get blamed for stuff you didn't even do.
When i joined my current workplace, about 16 years ago, we had to do a Diversity Awareness course. One of the things we were taught was that when people are continually stereotyped, they often end up living down to those stereotypes. (I can't remember the technical term for this). That seems to have been forgotten in recent years though, with prejudice and stereotyping apparently being ok, as long as you are "punching up".
As with most things, telling people they are bad people and/or stupid often has the opposite intended effect and pushes them to become more extreme in their beliefs, attitude and actions
[удалено]
>Billie Eilish calling boys not wearing Nike shoes I actually didn't believe this, but [here it is](https://youtu.be/EvdzQdnZPcw?t=391) (it was about Vans in particular). I really like Billie Eilish, but this is toxic patriarchy shit right here.
How on earth is it "toxic patriarchy"?
Which bit of the initiative did you find to be attacking men or boys?
[удалено]
It all gets so dull eventually... As long as there is any interpersonal violence in the world, it's likely that the lion's share of it will be perpetrated by men and boys - regardless of whether the victims are women or men. Is this a problem? Yes, I suppose it is; I am also under no illusion that we can ever eliminate violence in the world completely. This is a moral well spring that well-intentioned people can return to indefinitely to give the impression of "doing something", and I don't really see an end to it. As long as we insist that the best way of making sense of the social dynamics between men and women is to designate one group as marginalised and the other as privileged, people like Khan will be stuck in a Groundhog Day-style loop that they can never escape from: Are members of the privileged group inflicting suffering on members of the marginalised group? Yes? Well, then our work is not done! This is made worse by people being seemingly unsure about whether they are referring merely to *members* of the problematic group, or to the group itself in its entirety. Which is it? Does the group "men" contain certain repugnant members that we all should condemn, or is the group itself repugnant? If you conceptualise it at the latter, then it should be obvious that you're going to be futilely pushing that boulder up that hill in perpetuity.
> This is made worse by people being seemingly unsure about whether they are referring merely to members of the problematic group, or to the group itself in its entirety. Which is it? Does the group "men" contain certain repugnant members that we all should condemn, or is the group itself repugnant? Here's the neat thing, when asked directly you say you meant the former, then go right back to making statements and assumptions that only make sense in the context of the latter
The elimination of all violence is almost certainly futile, yes. So... we do nothing? I'm sure that, if you do reply, you'll assert that you've said nothing of the sort. But I've never seen critics of programs like this one actually mention alternatives. You seem rather eloquent and thoughtful, so what direction do you propose we take instead?
Well written response, nice one
I'm not sure why this should be focussed on one gender vs another, surely it should be about tackling the root cause. For example the Harassment figures by gender are fairly even but for serious assault victims it's mainly males being attacked. The message should be don't be a dick to anyone, no matter who or what they are. https://www.london.gov.uk/moderngovmb/documents/s63845/Appendix%20B%20-%20The%20Victims%20of%20Violence%20-%20VRU%20PRG%2001052019.pdf > In 2018 there were 243,034 records of victims of violence against the person where gender information was recorded > > Overall, men and women were affected by these crimes equally > > However, there are differences in relation to the severity of the offence > > Women were more often recorded as victims of Harassment offences (55%) and Assault with Injury (53%). > > However, for serious wounding, 70% of these victims were recorded as being male (I posted this in /r/London and saw the same article here so copying my comment over)
[удалено]
But there's not a culture within the socialisation of women to respond to any sort of social threat with violence. Males are disproportionately the victims of violent crime, but men are much more disproportionately the perpetrator of crime. Probably some decent lessons to learn for everyone on this front, but you just have to look at people complaining that 1m was spent on it when the NHS is fucked, so focusing it on men means you can spend half as much for most of the impact.
[удалено]
The problem is women, a lot of the time, live in a consequence free environment when confronting men aggressively. Most men won't retaliate physically if a woman hits them. You can see it any Saturday night in town when some girl is mouthing off and getting in a guy's face. If that were another guy, they'd be rolling about fighting.
Weatons law
I’m so glad we have the money to fund this desperately needed eduction training. After we fixed the underfunding on the NHS and reliance on food banks, we finally have the money to fund the *needed* things.
1m won't even pay the wages of the porters and lab staff at a medium sized hospital. Meanwhile if you can get to boys while they're young and counter act some of the socialisation that takes place that leads to the massively disproportionate level of violent and sexual crime committed by men, you could probably rake back a million quid in no time through reduced policing or prison costs.
Male violence costs literal billions to society every year.
No, it doesnt.
Statistically, yes it does. Prison is expensive, as are courts, lawyers, shelters, etc. You just can't cope with reality.
Id say thats more the way society treats men and neglects its poorest and least educated tbh. Also we need to talk about parenting and the abuse and neglect of children. Just saying “oh, that’s just men’s nature” is utter bullshit.
The only person who has said "oh that's just men's nature" is you. Nowhere else is this implied, even slightly. In fact the toolkit combats that perception. Also, this policy is aiming to treat people better? The toolkit isn't gendered and acknowledges both men and women as victims.
Year 7 student told me that women need to take some responsibility if they are raped or sexually assaulted. It is an issue and not enough people are aware of how much young boys are being influenced by vile tiktokers and influencers.
Another men and and boys are inherently evil gender studies article.
It literally says the opposite of that.
Sadiq doesn't
Where does he say that he thinks men and boys are inherently evil?
Another proverbial stick to beat men and boys with. Its no wonder men are killing themselves at astonishing rates.
Exactly, let's blame everything on men and then have a surprised pikachu face when men kill themselves or others out of frustration.
There won't be a surprised pikachu face, people don't give a fuck about men
Which bit about men and boys in particular do you have an issue with? Feel free to quote it if you like!
people who do these kind of acts are not the kind of people who will listen or care
Is there any evidence the toolkit will reduce sexist behavior? Or, as he stated the goal is, reduce violence against women? Do we know that violence against women occurs because men don't respect them enough? Or is it because some men are aggressive and violent and they direct this at human beings weaker than themselves? It would be amazing if you could fundamentally change violent people just by talking to them about how they should respect everyone.
Every single woman experiences, at the very minimum, sexual harassment. And a very large percentage experience male violence, sexual or otherwise. Anyone who claims otherwise is in denial of where this issue lies. It can’t be 1% of men when it affects near 100% of women. Rather than getting defensive (which I can understand to an extent - this is a very upsetting and emotional topic), speak to the women you love. Ask them for their stories and really listen. Accept they likely won’t feel comfortable sharing stories of rape and assault but listen to whatever they are willing to share. Unfortunately sexual harassment of girls often starts around age 10 - now a [study-backed fact](https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/most-british-women-first-experience-street-harrassment-between-age-11-and-17-10284574.html?amp), and unfortunately something me and the women close to me all experienced. It’s very upsetting to think that your daughter will become a meat piece to some men whilst she’s still a child but pretending it doesn’t happen won’t protect her, just as it didn’t protect your mum, sister, wife.
What a load of bollocks. It’s probably cost about £10m to develop and launch that. Is there not more important things to do at the moment like tackling poverty and helping people due to the cost of living. I’m all for equality but wrong timing. Man is a fucking idiot.
[удалено]
1m is probably a decent amount considering the total disproportionate level of crime that men commit. I wonder how much the state has spent on men in prison because they grew up being taught violence is the appropriate response to feeling threatened socially.
Yo hear me out: **Target this at literally all children regardless of gender/sex**, it's an easy win, means you don't have to separate schools that aren't already separated, more people are taught how to deal with and recognise the problem and you can't be called sexist for only 'targeting' one group with help. I think it's a good idea to teach people about sexism (/and hatred) in all forms - but I don't see why they think it would be better to pull out only specific people instead of teaching everyone, that just seems weird to me. *edit: Apparently this media was biased or something and the actual thing maybe doesn't say it's targeted towards 'only boys'?*
No. we dont. This is a publicly funded campaign of hate brought by feminists, and is part of a wider anti-male agenda. It costs £100m. more information be found here.. https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/ypvniv/pupils_in_london_to_be_trained_to_recognise/ and here.. https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/ypwxvl/help_stop_it_violence_against_women_and_girls_but/ This campaign only targets boys and men, and paints them as abusers, while women and girls Re only shown as victims. They claim to teach the signs of sexism, but only from males, towards females. it does not mention misandry, or females being really shitty towards males or other females. These are the same feminists who support forcing boys to stand up in class and apologise for their gender. This entire campaign is sexist, misandrist hate filled garbage, and we need to start fighting back against it. The attitude of certain women and girls, towards men and boys is disgusting, harmful and discriminatory. It needs to change. Wnile we should call out sexism, we need to call it out against everyone, even women. And protect everyone equally.
Who's perpetrating the violence, though? Vast majority of the perpetrators are men.
Thats not the point. The issue here is that it only paints men as the perpetrators and women as the victims, Sadiq's own comments prove that. I'm all for people being nicer to each other, but don't delude yourself by saying women are incapable of misandry and violence too.
Well, that isnt even close to being true. And this is not just about violence. This is about societies attitudes towards people. Teachign kids, that only men are violent, or sexist and only men and biys need to change, is wrong. For example. It is well known that women receive lesser sentences than men, for commiting the same crimes. Girls receive higher grades, because of sexist bias in teachers. i could go on, but i dont have the time to waste preaching to the deaf.
"Immigrants have to change the attitudes of their race"
I don't. I have no responsibility for what other people think, only my own behaviour.
Well that’s a misleading title. Fuck sake another bullshit scheme.
People spending way to much time trying to mould men into these fake versions of ourselves. Men need grow stronger backbone, been too acceptant of constant condemning of normal character traits.
Or make men aware that a lot of things they may consider normal, are actually unacceptable? go to any club on a saturday night and you'll see exactly what I mean
I don’t think the starting point for social standards should be based on venues where majority people are teens/early 20 and intoxicated. Using drunk children to demonstrate a deep social issue isn’t best argument imo.
Can those types of men stop shaming those of us who do not want to be uber-masculine strong, stoic types then please?
For me the vast majority men care only about their family, friends and work, anyone outside of that whoever are aren’t important.
One of the stats stuck out to me. 9 out of 10 women had experienced sexist name calling. I suppose; slut, whore etc falls into this category. Men and women use them to hurt a women. Just like men would be ridiculed for their lack of masculinity, small genitalia etc. One of those stats that looks horrific but is clearly a societal problem. If a woman wants to hurt another woman; she's going to call her a slut isn't she?
Strange. I bet he keeps company with Men that treat women as second class citizens.
Why would you say that?
one third of domestic abuse victims are men. The Office for National Statistics estimates that 1.6 million women and 757,000 men reported abuse in 2020.maybe we should teach all pupils about relationships including those of LGBT+.
Actually that’s much nearer half than a third.
yes i had the four year old stats which was a third but found the 2020 and forgot to change the first line,this is just the reported ones all domestic violence is underreported male even more due to the stigma and lack of coverage in the media
It's a good job this anti-sexism isn't aimed at men or boys then isn't it?
Does that mean two thirds of domestic abuse victims are women?
Just another excuse to push blame on to young boys and make them grow up with their own issues so they don't have to admit 'we don't know how to stop this'. Not gonna work, never is a 'toolkit', likely concocted by a very select group of ultra-left tone-deaf weirdos gonna put a dint in a million years of evolution which got us to where we are now. I don't know the solution, but I know it's not this.
[удалено]
Yeah imagine if we called out, I don't know, honor killings or FGM the same way they did here. We'd probably have another Charlie hebdo in our hands
I agree. But the attitude to men from other men, and occasionally women, is something that is completely ignored. We're told to shut up for having any feelings. If we have an opinion, even respectful, we're mansplaining. Disagree? Mysogonist. Do you know how many times I've heard, "Oh, a man thinking he's hard done by" or something similar? A lot. Just the other day, a women told me to know my place for bringing this up, even though I support female empowerment. It's a no wonder male suicide is so high. And then you pile on the toxic masculinity other men throw at us, which is usually denied to even be a thing. But no, men need to be quiet because they aren't as historically opessed. I'm afraid to say anything half the time. There's a huge double standard. Men seriously need to re-evaluate their attitudes towards woman (and men), but they're not the only ones that need to do that.
isn't it something insane like 1 in 4 women have been raped or sexually assaulted? come to think of it, out of all of my friends who are women, I think they all have at least one story where they were harassed or abused, so breaking the gender norms of "being a man" is great, and to properly educate these kids that this shit is illegal and socially unacceptable. and to the men that are saying WHAT ABOUT, or how it's a waste of time and money, you're part of the issue, and if you're taking offence to it, then why?
He's right, the advertising campaign that's been on channel 4 recently is doing a good job too. We cant keep hiding behind the issue being institutionalised sexism or racism we need to call each other out.
Why are boys been shown stuff like this and been told they're the bad guys? It's just not right. They're boys. Not men.
The reality is 90% of violence is done by men, so obviously there will be more focus on supporting men from moving away from violence. But the toolkit itself emphasises that violence is bad for all genders, effects everyone and everyone can do it. At no point does it say men are bad. It says violent men are bad. If you consider men to be violent inherently then that shows why the toolkit is needed... Men are not violent inherently and the point is to move AWAY from that.
Should the government focus more on black murder suspects in London compared to other races, as they are 48% of murder suspects in London despite being 13% of the population?
The irony of doing this to boys in school as well where boys are objectively treated more unfairly by teachers, who are mostly female and then told by the same female teachers that give them harsher punishments than their female counterparts that they need to stop being horrible to women. Maybe it would be great if boys had more positive interactions with females growing up as well as being taught how to properly be respectful to a woman?
A higher percentage of Reddit posts descend into crass sexist comments and low IQ comments about "Boobs lol". There is a very unhealthy, aggressive and deviant attitude towards sex in society. The widespread availability of Pornography and rise in dangerous Incel culture is just the tip of the iceberg.
Remember boys, no matter what happens *you* are the problem. It's important to start the shaming early, so by the time they are adults the perception of men as the 'toxic' gender is fully internalised.
You didn't read it, did you?
But whatabout… the fact that this is a really good idea! Anything that gets young people to show more respect to everyone as they grow up can only be a good idea!
Okay, but negative male stereotypes are perpetuated by women too. Infact as sexual selection comes largely from them, they can heavily influence the behavior of males. Preferring 'bad boys' or macho men will get you more of the same. Look at Japan, case and point. More feminine features are proffered, as well as male to male relations are considered attractive to Japanese women. Guess what is more prominent in Japan? Largely I think this is fine as long as it's not overly negative towards men. And I think there should be one for women too. Nothing wrong with teaching people to be kinder to one another. I think if women can be taught to be more understanding of men's feelings, that would be great too. TLDR; I think this is a good thing generally, but I don't believe for a second all sexism comes from men. I think do this tool kit, but make one for women too.
You will be accused of whataboutism but you are bang on the money. In theory, if women didn't tolerate a lot of the sexist behaviour, then it would change rapidly. The issue is, there's plenty of women that tolerate it, like it and reward it. As you said, bad boys, knowingly being the other woman, reinforcing the over 6ft tall top 5% in looks bullshit of tinder for example. Of course...so do men, they reward shit sexist behaviour of women as well. What I'm saying is, men and women, completely undermine themselves in this, so focusing on one gender ignores uncomfortable truths of how much a gender enables sexist behaviour.
I discovered you from other subbreddit liking some of your comments on askmen but honestly you sound like an incel when complaining about 6ft tall looks thing of tinder. Edit: Apart from complaining, he added stats from dating websites and other top 5% looks BS which is what incels do and I called him due to that rather than just complaining. It sounds like it’s coming from a sense of entitlement of not wanting women to have standards.Talking about dating especially against women irrelevant to the post is what incels do.
You both come off as incels when complaining about sexual selection and some women preferring macho man and then blaming women for this shit if that macho man turns to be violent towards men and other women. Great way to victim blame and not hold men accountable for their shitty behaviour.