Based on a broad sampling of media coverage during and after the Kosovo war, this article explores how the male victims of violence are marginalized or "effaced" from the prevailing media and human-rights discourse.

kanuk876 · 2010-08-23T04:26:31+00:00

FTA:

Young men were the group that was by far the most targeted in the conflict in Kosovo ... If apprehended by Serbian forces, the young men were at risk, more than any other group of Kosovo society, of grave human rights violations.

Many were executed on the spot, on occasion after horrendous torture. Sometimes they would be arrested and taken to prisons or other detention centres, while others would simply not be seen again. Others were taken for use as human shields or as forced labour. Many young men "disappeared" following abduction.

From the conclusions:

The first is that males tend to assume the status of "non-persons" in analyses and reportage of conflict and genocide. Most commonly, they are effaced from the picture. If their presence is noted at all, it is likely to be obliquely, with the gender variable subsumed by others (e.g., race/ethnicity, nationality, abstract "victim" status, colour of clothing). Campaigns aimed at the gender-selective killing of males will tend to be ignored or underemphasized in media coverage, in favour of a focus on secondary policies that target "worthy" victims (e.g., rape and harassment of women, forced expulsions). If the character of "gendercidal" strategies is noted, it will tend to be relegated to the later and less prominent reaches of coverage. All of these strategies can be isolated not only in media coverage, but in the humanitarian equation (e.g., the reports of organizations like Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International) and in policy statements by national governments, although there is no space to enter into a detailed discussion of these themes in the Kosovo context. Very similar patterns reasserted themselves during the slaughter in East Timor (September-October 1999), which followed upon the Kosovo war by a matter of mere months.

The conclusions that can and should be drawn from this body of evidence and argument depend very much on whether one views males as "natural" targets of victimization, and therefore irrelevant and unnewsworthy; or whether, on the other hand, one sees them as equally deserving of attention and protection in the face of violent assaults, up to and including genocidal mass killing. My own preferences are no doubt apparent. In my opinion, no meaningful claim to humanity, fairness, or analytical accuracy can be advanced by those who, consciously or unconsciously, would consign half the human race to second-class status in the humanitarian and policy equation. This article has argued that an alternative framework is possible, and needs to be adopted rapidly to ensure that all victims of violence receive the empathy, attention, and assistance they require.

calzenn · 2010-08-23T13:13:22+00:00

I have seen this for a long time in the media. It has been really evident not only in the Kosovo conflict as pointed out but also with a lot of reporting in Africa. I also like it when the media makes sure they know everyone is a female and nobody is a male.

The media has perhaps forgotten that the rapes and forced removals usually come after all the men who were protecting their families have died, they never seem to think of that...

"Police-woman hurt in car accident" takes precedence over "workers killed in factory" or "Officer Gunned Down!" They never say men killed in factory, or such... so very strange.

I think the attitude is that men are so expendable and so worthless that we dont really matter. It's almost like, " A few dozen men were killed... BUTOHMYGOD!!!! A WOMAN WAS RAPED!!!"

Moral outrage ensues about the rape and men are just collateral damage I guess. Like we mostly always have been... and now they need "guidelines" to point this out to journalists..

Comments