Can male on male violence ever be an issue of sex-based inequality?

January 22, 2021
24 upvotes

This is one of the main rebuttals by feminists to why we as a society mainly focus our efforts on women when discussing issues that disproportianally affect men. According to them, men will not become the victims of violence for being men and women would regularly do so for being women.

Until recently, I was under the impression that the sexism/misandry in violence against men would not even be a point of discussion and (in my opinion rightfully) accepted as a gendered issue in widely called "men's rights" subs, but apparently it is, at least to some, considering a counter-position received more than twice the amount of upvotes(minus downvotes) the victim got - even though it is either an unpopular thread overall or otherwise it is very controversial. Just those few votes do obviously not represent the whole sub - I am still surprised it would even get that far.

It is well known that male victims of violence receive less support, more ridicule in light of internalized misandry engraved in gender roles, less empathy and concern, less help from law enforcement, less consequences for perpetrators from both society and judges and so on.

This does not yet speak about how many of these things encourage men to become violent against men while fortunately promoting not to do so against women (even though this did cross the line into denying men actual self-defense), bring themselves into vulnerable positions (walk alone at night and be a coward if you are careful or afraid of doing so and attacked as irresponsible if you, who carries a higher risk, do not walk a girl home and then back alone, etc.), to unfortunately violently protect women which usually constitutes self-justice instead of proper constructice help and so on...

Anyway, if the victim is male, violence is seen as far more acceptable by both men and even more so women - but this post is about men for now - and the widely held internalized misandry even promotes to sort things out "like men". It sometimes appears like the long-term psychological effects on society of the sexist way men were widely shamed if they didn't want to fight in the war... - fighting back instead of demanding the other party not to fight in the first place is what makes you a "real man". I'm sure mothers who held and promoted this did influence their children and as the affected men would die in high numbers and probably had little influence on parenting anyway as one of the other many criteria on them working to become a "real man" was their status as providers that was probably also passed on by mothers. A new generation of both men and women would have internalized this misandristic idea of how to become a "real man" - but this is just a theory of mine and I guess the shaming of men in times of war was in itself an effect of prior misandry. As a victim, being a man makes you receive more ridicule by both men and women, many men have even been left by girlfriends over their victim status (both physical and sexual) and their loss of admission in this misandristic elite club called "real men" that holds and distributes the alleged privileges of every man and uses them as a reason to opress other men in order to be able to slice the cake into less and bigger pieces for all of them, while many women tend to try and attack those who are not accepted in that club for the attacks by said club. For example, "real man" raps about someone else being left for the "real man" by their wife over the "real man's" sexual superiority in size, stamina etc. Women feel objectified in response, assume he wants to distract from the insecurities about his body by reinforcing the idea of him being mainly defined by these exact parts of his body (makes sense - instead of attacking a different trait /s) and then release "revenge" tracks that subsequently get praised ans extended by mainstream media that dump the whole flow and wordplay departement and just basically restate and literally verify the rappers statements and attacks on their and all men's "manhood" and stamina, just in even more blatant and extreme words. The "real men", though the actual enemies, are praised while the innocent rest is attacked (as stated before, there is much more to being a "real man" than just sexual performance, take this as an isolated example to clarify the point) They are an easy target and therefore exploited - no reason for the "real men" in power to change anything about it. Most of this is, if at all, a subconscious process though, I guess. Still all just theorization.

The upvoted account even goes as far as to say that a victims safety and feelings are their responsibility alone and they should either learn self-defense, fight back and press charges or otherwise accept to get slapped around. So apparently, it would therefore be "common sense" (as stated in one of his comments) that this does not constitute a men's rights issue.

Due to the lack of empathy and concern for men's safety and feelings, the threshhold to use violence against men is significantly lower, men have to fight back significantly more often, will have to fight more severe violence, receive less often and less substantial help by bystanders, will face more severe consequences for both becoming a victim and acting in self-defense from both legal and social perspectices, they receive less help from authorities and even via charges their gender alone will decrease the perceived severety and therefore consequences as well as increase the threshhold of reasonable doubt compared to female victims. Internalized misandry makes them themselves feel like they had the responsibility to physically prove themselves and fight back in order to not lose their "real man" status while not deserving the protection of these things that leads to the huge discrepancy in violence and homicide as well as my anticipated reporting rates between the sexes. I therefore conclude both the case at hand as well as the analysis by comments in mensrights in and of themselves to constitute gendered issues in need of action by reasonable male advocates.

However, this is my conclusion only and if most people do not believe that a victim's safety and feelings are the responsibility of anybody but the victim, I doubt I would be able to change much.

What is your opinion? Why do you hold said position and what would have to happen for you to change it? Maybe we are on the same page regarding this or there could be a constructive discussion. Please stay away from attempts to belittle and hide the issue by grouping it together with other stuff and calling it "toxic masculinity". Call gender roles gender roles and call misandry misandry. No label needed.

TheRedArchive is an archive of Red Pill content, including various subreddits and blogs. This post has been archived from the subreddit /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates.

/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates archive

Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

Post Information
Title Can male on male violence ever be an issue of sex-based inequality?
Author DistrictAccurate
Upvotes 24
Comments 22
Date January 22, 2021 8:19 PM UTC (10 months ago)
Subreddit /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates/can-male-on-male-violence-ever-be-an-issue-of-sex.1062051
https://theredarchive.com/post/1062051
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates/comments/l2w3k3/can_male_on_male_violence_ever_be_an_issue_of/
Similar Posts
Red Pill terms in post
Comments
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2021. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter