"Everyone of those women would be justified in killing her spouse or partner"

outhouse_steakhouse · 2014-06-02T04:03:47+00:00

Wow… that author has her head totally up her ass. Men commit suicide and die in the workplace to "prove their masculinity" in a "male supremacist culture"? Riiiiight… there is no point in engaging with that level of stupidity and dishonesty.

SRSLovesGawker · 2014-06-02T04:05:45+00:00

Hilariously aspirational domain name... sadly, not much meat.

SlushoParasite · 2014-06-02T05:24:59+00:00

Are the statistics faulty? It's easy to be dismissive about the authors attitudes(I certainly am especially when they question men being "victims" of war), but what of the nuts and bolts of what they're saying?

modern_rabbit · 2014-06-02T05:55:02+00:00

http://poisonedwell.wordpress.com/2014/04/21/debunking-a-debunker/

I had a response all typed up but found it similar to this one, albeit less eloquent. Give it a read.

DavidByron2 · 2014-06-02T06:57:18+00:00

One of the criteria for a hate movement that is most difficult to show in feminism (and other female majority hate movements like the Women's Ku Klux Klan) is the aspect of violence. It doesn't have to be direct but a hate movement will teach tolerance of violence and encourage violence against it's target group.

Every one of these women would be justified in killing her spouse or partner and receiving an acquittal

This is not just the opinion of an idiot on the internet. Feminists successfully lobbied for changes to the law to reduce the charges or the sentence against women who kill their husbands. And they have successfully pushed the idea that when a woman brutally attacks a man or kills them there's probably a justification for it. This tolerance or encouragement of violence is mainstream "nice" feminism.

The radicals just say all men should be killed off.

ETA: tolerance of violence against men is a theme that comes up a lot in his or her writing. Raped men aren't really raped because they're only raped by men. Male domestic violence victims don't really feel it. Men who die on the job brought it on themselves. And on and on.

OsoFeo · 2014-06-02T06:05:30+00:00

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KA6R1DMb-Z8

God bless Bob Fosse.

Sasha_ · 2014-06-02T14:50:38+00:00

Yawn. 1/10 'must do better'.

c0mputar123 · 2014-06-02T18:12:37+00:00

Men have a higher suicide rate. Author makes no attempt to debunk this. It isn't a myth. Murder-suicides accounted for less than 5% of male suicides. Even if we eliminate all murder-suicides, there remains a problem with male suicides.
Is probably a silly claim anyways. I agree with the author for the most part.
How many were drafted? Even the author announced that women may have only made up 1M of the 5.4M violently killed during the Vietnam War. Of course it ignores sexual violence, because those victims remain alive.
Men do not work in dangerous jobs i norder to prove masculinity, but, mostly, to make good money. Just because we should expect a higher fatality rate for men doesn't mean there is no need to try and reduce that number. This particular issue doesn't need to be a gendered, but the ultimate goal of drawing attention to it is to reduce the number of work place fatalities. The problem is that most of them are men, and so it's not really much of a priority. That's probably why MRAs make it a gendered issue. Regardless, the author does not dispute the figure. Further, 28% of 351 female work-place fatalities mean 98 were homicide. Compared to 384 men. How that is "tellingly" explaining any other than the fact that men are murdered at far higher rates is unknown to me.
The typical because men do it to themselves, it's not a problem. This does not discredit the MRM goal to address violence against men. It's just plain stupidity. It's no surprise that some feminists look at spousal murder exclusively. The MRM only concerns itself with spousal murders when we're talking about a propensity by the courts to let the female perpetrator off the hook in some way. Other than that, when the MRM addresses the inordinately high homicide rate when males are the victims, it is not restricted to spousal murders, but all murders. Men are overwhelmingly the victims of murder, 77% of them in fact. Worse still, black people, and specifically men, make up a fraction of the population but make up more than 50% of the victims. Black men have the unfortunate reality of being black, and men.
Google "fathers win custody 70% of the time" and the top link is a debunking of the stat. It has no basis in reality, and was heavily distorted to fit an agenda.
& 8. Cannot be debunked by casting domestic violence prevalences over all the discrepenacies. Men are more likely to be physically assaulted by their spouses (severe included). Women are more likely to be more severely assaulted by their spouses (30% more). The majority of domestic violence is reciprocal. Finally, women are more likely to victimize their children. The author obviously only mentions instances and prevalences where women were victims or men were perpetrators with domestic violence history. The stats on women who were perpetrators with domestic violence history (unless it was "resistive" in which case it may have fallen under the umbrella of reciprocal domestic violence), and the stats on female caused child abuse, are noticably absent. Ultimately, it's a dumb angle to take. We know that when we take similar men and women who have committed similar crimes, men are overwhelmingly more likely to be investigated, charged, convicted, and recieve a harsher sentence. The author seeks to focus the jury and court biases that negatively impact men on just spousal issues, when it's actually been shown, categorically, when you control for all factors, men fare far worse when we talk about defendants.
Wealth? What does that have to do with earnings and ability to pay monthly bills? How does having $5600 help pay child support? This is an illogical argument, nevermind where they got the number.
Of course what the courts report and what is actually happening are 2 entirely different things. Feminists are well aware of this when they talk about rape prevalence rates regarding surveys and judicial stats. If you look at the CDC NISVS 2010 study, you can see that men are more likely to be physically assaulted by their spouses (severe included). Women are more likely to be more severely assaulted by their spouses (30% more). Numerous studies have verified that half or more than half of domestic physical violent relationships are reciprocal. Interestingly, the vast majority of violent relationships that were non-reciprocal had female perpetrators. The author was a simple google search away from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1854883/ The judicial stats are obviously skewed against men for reasons too numerous to state.
Infanticide isn't child murder apparently.
Apparently, a study about divorced people is applicable to all people.

newmobsforall · 2014-06-03T00:55:35+00:00

Men don't take more dangerous jobs to prove their masculinity. They choose more dangerous jobs because they pay more, and a man's worth is measured by his ability to provide, since he has no inherent worth as a human being.

Again, the idea that a woman should act as judge, jury, and executioner is really screwed up, and seems like a good way to open the flood gates to psychopaths.

Title	"Everyone of those women would be justified in killing her spouse or partner"
Author	Can_You_Dont
Upvotes	4
Comments	10
Date	June 2, 2014 3:32 AM UTC (12 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/272zlp/everyone_of_those_women_would_be_justified_in/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/everyone-of-those-women-would-be-justified-in.999815 https://theredarchive.com/post/999815

Comments