Social Experiment - Women Behaving Violently Towards Men

Why should a feminist shut up about domestic violence against women when they receive it most and the most severe physically, resulting in 2 deaths a week?

You can't conveniently ignore science and facts. A man is way more likely to kill his partner than a woman. The abusive is way more physical. On average men are stronger and bigger than women, meaning on most of these cases involve hitting relatively defenceless people hence the difference in reaction.

Can you make your misogynistic hate speech any more transparent?
Don't use gendered slut shaming slurs against feminists and act like it has no relation to your contempt for women.

How exactly is saying violence is wrong bs? Smh, so even when we condemn it we can't condemn it enough. Let me ask you this, why are you taking the focus away from a conversation about men and using it as an opportunity to attack feminists? Oh yeah because you don't actually care about it.

Except I didn't actually say that feminists shouldn't campaign for women's issues did I?

I said that when they can be so vocal about women's issues, they should also campaign for men's issues

Get that? If they want to admit they are self centered and only give a **** about women, then at least we can give them the credit of being true to themselves

However, as they claim they really do care about equality, while totally ignoring the fact that many more men die at work and are murdered,

treatment for mental health issues among men is abysmal,

general healthcare spending on men is proportionately low (breast cancer vs prostrate cancer anyone?),

men spend more time in jail than women for equivalent crimes

men are treated unfairly in divorce/family courts

and of course men are the victim of domestic abuse 40% of the time

it's hard to take their pathetic attempt at promoting "equality" seriously.

Please show me one protest or campaign, run by feminists, that specifically addresses the above issues (which are just some of the relevant issues).

Because if they support equality, there should have been many. I honestly can't say I've ever seen one

I didn't actually say you did, did I? You said they won't shut up, I asked why they should. Keep up.



Men aren't disproportionately effected by DV though.


Of course they are going to focus of women given they had the most inequality throughout history and worldwide out of the two binary genders. Just like the civil rights movement didn't focus on white people, that doesn't mean they weren't for equality, because they focus on RACISM not exceptions of black people discriminating against whites.


Oh here we go, the old talking point routine. Men are murdered by other men, not because of sexism against them.

Don’t like the abuse and danger male labor workers face? Join a workers’ union.
Don’t like that males make up the majority of labor jobs? Join feminism and fight the patriarchal idea that certain jobs are meant for men and certain jobs are meant for women.

But instead you go your route of doing **** all and just using things you pretend to care about as a reason to bash feminism, even though it doesn't hold up and it never.


The nhs page mentions no gender restrictions on available help.


Do something about by it then, feminists can't mobilise for every single health issue that affects one gender more than the other, I severely doubt everyone who supports breast cancer identifies as feminist, it's about illness not gender politics.


Which is because the patriarchal notion that women are weaker.


The stats show that when asked for custody they aren't treated that differently. Teach your sons to be responsible fathers, because most of the time, the father doesn’t even ask for his kids. Join feminism and fight the patriarchal idea that women are always the best primary parents.


The stats vary, but it is clear that the severe physical abuse and partner murder is suffer by mostly women.


No it isn't, every thing you listed is either nonsense or stuff feminism does fight against.


Many of the stuff you mentioned isn't the result of sexism and is cover by other things. Such as workers unions and mental health sites, you have no prove the people in those don't identify as a feminist also. For the stuff that has relevance:

http://www.feminist.com/resources/links/links_men.html



The entire history of fighting against gender roles for both sexes is one, you're wilfully blind.

Your logical fallacy is the texas sharpshooter: https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/the-texas-sharpshooter

The article you posted is also dated as far back as 2011, and its 2014 now if I'm not mistaken.

The credibility of the source is also questionable, given the quality of the articles that get posted there.

I have posted a link that reports on a rather interesting social experiment. A pair of actors were hired to act as a couple and stage blazing rows in public. Both the man and the woman took it in turn to be the aggressor and obviously they switched roles when they were in different areas, no doubt so that they could have fresh witnesses.

The reactions to both scenarios were very different.

There was also a rather shocking statistic cited: 40% of domestic violence is suffered by men. I wonder if it would be given more focus if it accounted for at least 50%? Or does that even matter? Would men ever be treated as favourably as women in this regard?

http://www.buzzfeed.com/candacelowry/watch-how-people-react-when-they-see-a-woman-abuse-a-man-in

The experiment is unrealistic because the woman did not pose a serious physical threat to the man whilst the man did pose a serious physical threat to the woman.

If the woman had held a knife or a gun towards the man or if the man had been obviously incapacitated in some way, the bystanders would not have been laughing and would have been trying to help.

We're socially conditioned to see women as weaker. Much of this conservative thinking is not really based on reality.

If a woman hit me as a man, I'd hit her back. I think all men should. I'll get flamed, but then it's self-defence and protection.

See rather than that, I'd say whoever hits you, try to only defend yourself rather than hit and engage in a fight. Same if a man hits you. Or a man hits a woman.
We shouldn't be promoting more violence in the name of equality - we should promote no violence regardless of sex.

You'll find that self defence means neutralising a threat which usually requires force in the opposite direction. Putting your hands up in front of your face against a large attacker throwing haymakers to various parts of your body is a good way to guarantee getting your ass beat

I don't see why they would given they don't face as much abused, nor do they face as severe physical abuse. Around 2 women a week are killed by their partners in the uk I've read.

So their size is a pretty important factor. The poster said he'd hit a woman who hit him, not a large woman who repeatedly hit him. If a small woman came up to him, hit him and then didn't seem to continue being violent, should he really hit back?
(Or, a smaller man who didn't pose any real threat to him)

I have posted a link that reports on a rather interesting social experiment. A pair of actors were hired to act as a couple and stage blazing rows in public. Both the man and the woman took it in turn to be the aggressor and obviously they switched roles when they were in different areas, no doubt so that they could have fresh witnesses.

The reactions to both scenarios were very different.

There was also a rather shocking statistic cited: 40% of domestic violence is suffered by men. I wonder if it would be given more focus if it accounted for at least 50%? Or does that even matter? Would men ever be treated as favourably as women in this regard?

http://www.buzzfeed.com/candacelowry/watch-how-people-react-when-they-see-a-woman-abuse-a-man-in

You don't seem to have a clue how changing the law works - blindly complaining about an invisible patriarchy and a sexist society will not universally alter all known laws to provide equal treatment of men and women.

If feminists believe in equality (their own words), then they should specifically be out there protesting for women's sentences in prison to be increased.

Or protesting for better healthcare spending on men.

It seems to me they love reaping the benefits of the current society

- they can protest and complain endlessly about bull**** nonsensical things like lads magazines and wolf whistling but don't give a **** about issues which can result in unnecessary death of men?

This isnt the 18th century anymore, women are equal and even advantaged in many aspects of society.

There are issues affecting both genders- if you want to portray yourself as a supporter of gender equality, then take interest in issues of both genders.

Not surprising no one takes any of you seriously

See rather than that, I'd say whoever hits you, try to only defend yourself rather than hit and engage in a fight. Same if a man hits you. Or a man hits a woman.
We shouldn't be promoting more violence in the name of equality - we should promote no violence regardless of sex.

Which is because the patriarchal notion that women are weaker.

I never stated that would change specific laws. So what are you talking about? Decades of critical writing demonstrates an ideology that you claim to be blind to.


The law is equal, the judges decision is not.

Are you out there protesting this? Are you out there protesting how white people get lesser sentences? Do YOU not believe in equality?

It's not an issue that's going to mobilise people, it's one that people are going to write about and criticise. We want equal sentencing, if that's not enough for you then you are free to do more about it. No one is stopping you.


Biologically women have more health risks hence why they pay more insurance in most states: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/19/health-care-costs-women-affordable-care_n_1364556.html

To act like this is due to misandry and needs to be protested asap is idiotic. You're not oppressed no matter how bad you want you to be.


So do men, why aren't you on the street demanding


That's a straw feminist, to act like 2 issues out of our entire history is what defines us, when they aren't even issues all feminists agree on. Also, don't try to trivialise the fight against harassment on the street as a nonsensical compliant of harmless wolf whistling. Whilst conveniently ignoring people like Wendy Davis and Malala Yousafzai. The issues that result in the death of men are either A unrelated to sexism, making them more class related or B fought by other organisations, or C coincide with the fight against gender roles that feminism has fought against.

It's really ****ing simple. Don't claim to support equality when you only ever address the issues of one gender.

But that's an idiotic statement, by that logic gay rights and civil rights shouldn't claim to support equality because they focused on one sexual orientation or race. The fact is that feminists fight gender roles which do and HAVE addressed issues for both genders. The majority of our work focuses on female oppression because females globally and historically have been oppressed because of their gender.


And disadvantaged in other aspects of society. That's western society within regards to the law, please don't act like sexism isn't still very present globally or even socially in the west.



You have no proof that I don't. I don't see you talking about women's issues once so you're a complete hypocrite hence why no one will ever take your movement seriously.


If no one took is seriously we wouldn't have made the advancement throughout history, silly.