How to argue against the "(cishet) men are inherently more dangerous" rhetoric?

Complex_Experience83 · 2023-05-08T23:59:35+00:00

Use thetinmanblog’s posts. Unfortunately the data in feminist circles is skewed and cherry picked against men. This post is great. Something like 80% or violent crime is perpetrated by men but the reality is that 0.2% of all men perpetrate that crime. And men are still more likely to experience violence than women. TheTinMan has given me a lot of perspective on this.

a-man-from-earth · 2023-05-08T23:10:09+00:00

It's analogous to blaming black men for violence. It's treating people as part of a group instead of as an individual regardless of immutable characteristics. In polite society this is not acceptable, except if the target is men or white people. And this exception makes no sense. It's still bigotry.

JJnanajuana · 2023-05-09T02:08:27+00:00

If the person is worried about their safety...

It's a teeny tinny percentage of men that are dangerous. (and then, most often towards other men)

Another (I guess smaller, I dont have stats) teeny tiny percentage of women are dangerous too.

You're also four times more likely to be killed by a cow than by a shark. Does that make cows increadably dangerous? No, your not likely at all to be killed by either.

Theres also some hype about the dangers... Perceptions aren't acurate and fear gets views,

The drop in female homicide victimisation in Australia is spescific to australian female homicides. But it points out that people percieve dv and related homicde as higher than they used to percieve it.

They point to news covering female homicides more, and the way they spin it, and to anti-violence campainers with stats like "one woman killed each week". And point out that,

Despite these concerns, the risk of homicide among women in Australia has been falling steadily for almost 30 years

So our fears are going up, while the killing is going down.

Edit: grammer for readability.

RhinoNomad · 2023-05-09T02:35:53+00:00

It's pretty easy. Compare it to black men.

If you use the same logic in any other demographic, you'd rightfully be called bigotted. Why not with men?

Sorry-Difference5942 · 2023-05-09T03:11:51+00:00

So I'll take a different tack then a lot of folks and say this.

Are cishet men inherently dangerous? If the answer is affirmative, end of story. Why bother arguing with someone who perceives a vast swath of society to be *uncivilized".

If it's not inherent, then what are we doing to prevent it?

If you wanted to argue this on racial lines, most decent people would say that there are a variety of socioeconomic factors that lead folks into lives of crime and make them more dangerous people. Funny how that goes completely out the window if it's a man because we assume... what, that the majority of men are living the high life and are making bank? Lol. Most men are towards the tail end of the socioeconomic hierarchy. There are tons of factors that play into this.

Idk, people can make whatever decisions they want regarding men. And I won't lie, I've been hesitant about safety myself as a man who has had sex with men. But there's a difference between personal safety and bigotry and unfortunately there seems to be a lot of bigotry argued for in he name of safety.

SpicyMarshmellow · 2023-05-09T06:40:27+00:00

I think the response is to point out how men vs women performing the same behaviors isn't perceived or responded to the same by society. Like women can be openly violent, and it isn't taken seriously, while men are far, far more likely to get in legal trouble. Entanglement with the law creates more readily available statistics. This becomes a positive feedback loop. Men's bad behaviors are higher visibility, thus reinforcing the perception, thus prompting more critical attention on men, thus further raising visibility. And the data/research feminists like to promote do not control for this, or blatantly lean into it.

Basically, how the fuck can you trust any statistics on male violence, when women can beat their husbands, call the police to have their husband arrested, and then the husband becomes a male violence statistic for being beaten up by his wife? How can you trust sexual violence statistics when definitions of rape often exclude men. When the situation is so skewed that adult women can get pregnant raping underage boys and sue them for child support when they turn 18?

And I do think it's true that men are more likely to murder. But then murder statistics need to be put in perspective with population. How many men are actually committing murder? And then that needs to live in the shadow of the fact that men as the expendable gender is deeply ingrained in our society, thus OF COURSE men are going to kill themselves and each other more often than women, because it's seen as being of lesser consequence by everyone, including women. This can be reinforced with the indisputable data that the overwhelming majority of male violence is directed at other men, not women. Nevermind how often women promote violence in the men in their lives, like openly admitting that they love it when men fight over them, or convincing men to do violence for them. Not something I'd bring up because it can't be substantiated, but I still think anyone honest should be able to admit that it's a thing that happens.

monkey_gamer · 2023-05-08T23:30:33+00:00

The problem is these people ignore the reasons why these men are violent. Plus putting a heavy emphasis on physical violence, conveniently downplaying the way that people, especially women, can be emotionally violent. It’s scapegoating.

Gender relations are kinda fucked up right now and women want to put all the blame for that on men.

It’s not something you can really argue against. You just have to avoid these people.

amakusa360 · 2023-05-09T01:50:16+00:00

Point out that queens were 38% more likely to cause wars than kings.

FightHateWithLove · 2023-05-09T12:00:05+00:00

Well, first of all when women commit sexual violence it tends to be defined out of existence or just chuckled off (same with domestic violence). But it's also worth noting than when we say men are more likely to commit violent or sexual crimes, we're saying men are more likely to do the evil versions of the things that men are more likely to do in general.

Men are expected to be the big, bold, loud, notable action takers and the pursuers of sex. Whether it's testosterone, societal expectations and conditioning or some likely combination, men are expected to initiate, take risks, and make definitive actions.

Men are more likely to commit murder but also more likely to perform life saving heart surgery. Both are violent, life changing acts. Men are more likely to be arsonists, but also more likely to be firefighters. More likely to steal or to provide for a family. Men are more likely to assault, but also more likely to protect. (And when they are made into solders the difference often becomes a matter of perspective.)

Men are more likely to seek, initiate and escalate sexual activity. Whether they want to or not, it's the role society assigns them, especially the cishet men. So that they also sometimes do it in ways that are harmful or illegal, is terrible but not condemning of men as a whole.

You may as well condemn doctors because they're the only ones that commit medical malpractice. Or attorneys because they sometimes help murderers escape justice.

mcmonties · 2023-05-09T11:25:26+00:00

Maybe some IPV/domestic violence statistics would help shed some light

Some key takeaways:

Overall, 22% of individuals assaulted by a partner at least once in their lifetime (23% for females and 19.3% for males)

Rates of female-perpetrated violence higher than male-perpetrated (28.3% vs. 21.6%)

Among large population samples, 57.9% of IPV reported was bi-directional, 42% unidirectional; 13.8% of the unidirectional violence was male to female (MFPV), 28.3% was female to male (FMPV)

Eight studies directly compared men and women in the power/control motive and subjected their findings to statistical analyses. Three reported no significant gender differences and one had mixed findings. One paper found that women were more motivated to perpetrate violence as a result of power/control than were men, and three found that men were more motivated; however, gender differences were weak

None of the studies reported that anger/retaliation was significantly more of a motive for men than women’s violence; instead, two papers indicated that anger was more likely to be a motive for women’s violence as compared to men.

matrixislife · 2023-05-09T00:11:24+00:00

Not when they are my father, my brother, my sons.

No-Knowledge-8867 · 2023-05-08T23:43:46+00:00

Men are also, by far, the major recipients of awards for bravery. I think, from memory, in Carole Hooven's book "Testosterone," it was given as >95%, which means men are the most dangerous, but also the safest people to have around. So, how do you square that circle?

Forgetaboutthelonely · 2023-05-09T14:13:49+00:00

Call them out for being a TERF.

call them out for promoting transphobia by reinforcing TERF rhetoric.

Sydnaktik · 2023-05-09T09:30:36+00:00

They are statistically more dangerous, not inherently.

To judge individuals based on the activities of a rare few outliers of some groups they've been associated to and not by choice is inhumane.

Some other guy being more dangerous says absolutely nothing about you or who you are. There is nothing inherently dangerous about being a man.

You can better understand the inhumaneness of it when you see what's being used to try and advocate for the misandrist point of view: what if there's one poisonous M&M in the bowl? obviously you through the whole thing away, in fact you burn it down just to be sure. What if a breed of dog is dangerous, you make laws forcing people to muzzle the dogs and keep them locked up.

But here's the thing, M&M aren't even alive, dogs are not people. We can infringe on the individual rights of M&Ms and dogs based on statistical likelyhoods caused by different individuals because these things just don't get to have human rights. Men do and it's when you lose sight of that, that you start to fail to see what's so wrong with rhetoric that claims that men are inherently dangerous and comparing men to M&Ms or dogs.

his__ · 2023-05-09T11:27:11+00:00

Have you ever thought to ask why men are committing more crimes?

Couldn't have anything to do with the mental health crisis men are dealing with, or the emasculation of men, or the fact that from the time they are little boys they are taught to suppress their anger instead of working through it, or any of that, could it?

ArmchairDesease · 2023-05-09T15:03:22+00:00

I would counter-argue that the overwhelming majority of men are more likely to protect you than to attack you.

Poly_and_RA · 2023-05-09T21:04:01+00:00

It's indeed true that the specific phrase "cishet men" (on occasion expanded to "white cishet men") has become the default go-to phrase meaning roughly "very privileged folks who have no clue about discrimination and is in all things perpetrators; never victims.

And it's worth it to examine the phrase in a bit more detail, to discover a core of feminists appropriating a victim-status that it's not reasonable for them to have.

The phrase has three parts:

Cis -- someone is cis if the gender they were assigned at birth corresponds to the gender they are. (or the gender they identify as if you're not willing to accept the sex/gender split)
het -- someone is heterosexual if they're sexually attracted only to people of the opposite binary gender.
men -- someone is a man if they identify as a man; or if they're biologically male if you don't accept the sex/gender split.

Now, the important part to notice here, is that these 3 are NOT comparable. You might see that more clearly if we turn it upside down and talk about the OPPOSITE of these 3 things:

Trans -- someone is trans if the gender they were assigned at birth DOES NOT correspond to the gender they are (or the gender they identify as if you don't accept the gender/sex split). Only a tiny fraction of people are trans, and the people who are are subject to a lot of very strong negative prejudices. Hatred and harassment up to and including violent attacks are depressingly common, and stigma is strong enough that it probably is a key reason why the suicide-rate among trans people is depressingly high. (especially for trans people who do NOT get adequate treatment and/or lack good social support)
bi-, pan- or homo-sexual (sometimes summarized as "queer", though that term can include other groups as well) These people make up only a small fraction of people, and while acceptance has grown leaps and bounds in modern liberal countries recently, up until recently they were subject to ruthless persecution up to and including being rounded up during the holocaust and sent to gas-chambers for the "sin" of being attracted to the "wrong" people. In quite a few countries there's still draconian punishments for being gay.
women -- Roughly half of all people are women. In modern countries with decent gender-quality, statistically they do BETTER than men in many important measures; and worse than men in some other important measures. Overall it's a bit of a toss-up which gender has it "worse", it's possible to conclude either way depending on which things you prioritize.

Can you see how one of these 3 is NOT in any way shape or form comparable to the other?

2 of these are marginalized minorities that were, and are today subject to a lot of very bad discrimination, abuse and persecution.

The third? It's a demographic group that in at least modern countries with decent gender-equality doesn't do noticeably worse than anyone else.

In other words, the phrase "cishet men" groups together 3 things, and thus implies that the 3 are comparable privileges; when reality is that where two of them (being cis and being heterosexual) are very substantial privileges; being a man isn't much of an advantage at all.

(some would even argue it's a disadvantage. Myself I think it depends on what you prioritize, men tend to be over-represented at both extremes, so if your goal is to clim to the highest peaks of society, I think you still have an advantage as a man. But on the other hand if your goal is to AVOID falling to the deepest abyss of society; then it's better to be a woman. There's more men than women among presidents and billionaires, but there's also more men than women among the homeless, the people in prison and the people who die from suicide)

DrH_0506 · 2023-05-09T06:15:21+00:00

Agree with everyone here; you can't argue with people like this.

Perhaps you could kindly remind them that men aren't the number one perpetrators in every single type of violent crime. Such a generalisation is built on generalising violent crime.

After all, violence against children -i.e., child abuse/maltreatment, death arising from abuse/maltreatment, and infanticide (especially neonaticide)- have (cishet) women as the number one perpetrators.

Society does not endorse caution against mothers (women), even though following their logic it should, and you may wonder as to why.

thithothith · 2023-05-09T22:51:31+00:00

Tangentially related, but If I was cautious and hateful towards a breed of dog, and generalized each individual dog of that breed as a potential threat to be treated as a monster until proven otherwise, and I was self aware over the fact, I would at least stop pretending I cared at all about equality of treatment across dog breeds

lumen-lotus · 2023-05-13T18:33:33+00:00

Word of advice: void words like "cishet" from your vocabulary. They're just men. A minority of men commit crimes, and people generalize the majoritarian of peaceful, law-abidding men as violent.

Onemoretime536 · 2023-05-09T17:12:42+00:00

You could point out that it is still less than 1% or men and point out that it sounds like they are trying to start a gender war if they cared so much about violence crime then they would include men in the conversation considering men are far more likely to be a victim of violent crime and men are far more likely to be violence towards another man.

IngoTheGreat · 2023-05-24T15:54:38+00:00

Are people responsible for actions of other people in their demographic, or not?

Why are men the only group that it's supposedly okay to hold responsible for the actions of a minority of the group they belong to? What other group can you do that with and have it be okay?

It's special pleading, hypocrisy, and a double standard. One standard for every other demographic (each person is responsible only for their own actions), a different standard for the "men" demographic (all men are collectively responsible for the actions of some men).

random_sm · 2023-05-28T12:50:22+00:00

By the same logic we should avoid black people. How come avoiding men is not sexist but avoiding black people is racist?

JetChipp · 2023-05-28T13:14:41+00:00

Ask them if they think women are inherently more dangerous and murderous towards children, show them the statistics of infanticide and domestic violence against children, ask them if it's okay to treat every mother as a potential threat to the lives of their children.

Point out that if a minority of men commiting the majority of violent crimes (althought I wonder how these statistics would look like if the judicial system actually gave women the same harsher treatement that it gives to men) proves that men are inhetently more dangerous/violent then the vast majority of men being peaceful an more likely to protect you than attack you proves that men are inherently more protective. Show them that the judicial system is far from unbiased when it comes to judging men's and women's crimes:

https://www.reddit.com/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates/comments/132e5g5/a_new_lens_i_found_on_the_sentencing_gap/jiqml87?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button

https://www.reddit.com/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates/comments/g5duga/court_bias_and_legal_discrimination_against_men/

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2144002

https://www.reddit.com/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates/comments/1122yyp/sentencing_disparity/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button

https://archive.fo/er1bt

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01419870.2010.487568

BKEnjoyerV2 · 2023-05-08T23:53:40+00:00

This is a difficult situation, they only say that men are always the aggressors and women need their sex only spaces because they’re mostly abused by men only, which is kinda wrong just because women don’t tend to use violence against other women

alfredo094 · 2023-05-09T17:27:23+00:00

Ask them about statistics by race and check if they are consistent. There's no arguing around men being more violent, but how you go from there, and how consistent you are is hugely important.

Aimless-Nomad · 2023-05-10T08:14:06+00:00

You don't.

2023-05-11T23:24:54+00:00

Some research has suggested that women may exhibit agression in a non-physical manner, such as gossip, social sanctionings and so on. This was conducted in a canadian high school -if I'm not mistaken- where scientists analyzed agressive behavior of boys and girls.

It is indeed unfair to use physical violence as the whole-encompassing reprasentation of human agression, as men tend to exhibit this act far more than women do. Violence does not need to be physical; how many people have been pushed to mental illness and suffering through harsh words, gaslighting and subtle bullying?

I don't believe cruely and agression are gender specific, and we must keep in mind the flaw of 21st century feminist analyses of gender related agression.

HinduProphet · 2023-05-09T11:29:30+00:00

The best argument is that society protects women just for inherently being women, even if men are inherently more violent.

Title	How to argue against the "(cishet) men are inherently more dangerous" rhetoric?
Author	Normal_Study
Upvotes	140
Comments	84
Date	May 8, 2023 5:01 PM UTC (3 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates/comments/13bxyoz/how_to_argue_against_the_cishet_men_are/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates/how-to-argue-against-the-cishet-men-are-inherently.1218713 https://theredarchive.com/post/1218713

Comments