Note in the year she is discussing – there were an equal number of forced to penetrates, but it does not sound like the same was done with regards to men being coerced.
Note the large flaws in methodology, and how it would inflate the numbers of rapes, and cause a woman who had a drink or two before sex to be classed as a victim (where she is still fully able to choose). How it would class repeatedly asking – as criminal, but when a woman does it on many separate occasions (and they do, it is just men would be socially destroyed if they dared complain)? If this methodology persisted, what would the effect be? When the broader society, notably men, fully understand this, who is it, that will be seen to have driven these choices? What will these men presume the purpose was, and the implications of that?
It is like the bias in Duluth, where women were never asked abuser questions, nor men victim ones, in the original design of that model. Further, even when the lead person acknowledged that issue as a fatal flaw, it could never get broader discussion.
Is this not in effect a small group of older women who silenced all others having clearly and loudly told men (most importantly young men) in the name of all women that only women counted, and men were responsible always, even for women’s bad decisions, because “women good, men bad”. Was not the same thing replicated in dv, where her beating him was in effect a cause for celebration?
Do we not appreciate that this sort of thing https://nationalpost.com/news/the-dark-secret-of-juvenile-detention-centres-is-the-sexual-abuse-inflicted-by-female-staffers is likely happening in other spaces, and the female offenders in question have been made to think their actions are unimportant (even where research clearly indicates the opposite) and also have been given cause to believe they have no real reason to fear being caught.
How did we arrive at the notion of “no woman would” really? The research from decades earlier made it clear that women did, and there was great harm when they did. It also discussed the issues of social blindness. We need to ask, why reports like this one https://canadiancrc.com/PDFs/The_Invisible_Boy_Report.pdf from health Canada, did not get discussion? Why it is, the research it cites, which is years old, and other, never received serious consideration. The experience of Michelle Elliot when she tried to do research in this area provides powerful conclusions. This is to say, those who screamed her down and in effect accused her of misogyny, were feminist women. These feminists did not care that there were female abusers, only men should be seen as accountable in their narrative. The reality of these narratives, and the hate behind them, should always have been clear. Yet many of those who believed thought they were doing nothing wrong, and even when they saw that there were male victims and female perpetrators chose only to change course quietly, and believe that the previous lies did no harm. Even those many of those who always knew, did not seem to think this would do real harm, or that harm would eventually come of this, but that it had yet to happen.
Are not those who believed this would not do harm, now the ones telling their daughters that nothing changed in dating? Telling their daughters they should just wait for him to approach. Blaming social media, where their daughters resorted to getting affirmation on-line because it had been cut off in person? This while a growing number of their daughters struggle with their mental health because of the natural result of demonizing men? Are they not in effect gaslighting their daughters when they tell them that they should just wait the guys will find and approach you? As though nothing changed, even where the evidence is overwhelming it has. Just as bad are they not encouraging their daughters to blame men, for not approaching, where they were happy to have men screamed at to leave women alone? Happy to laugh at men abused and cheer on women lying to get pregnant? Or at least look away and pretend it was not happening, even while it had spread to network television? Pretend it was not happening, where they knew their daughters peer boys were watching their own mothers laughing along?
I would ask, when younger women, realize that work was never privilege and who screamed at men around this? Who remained silent? When they realize that there were always male victims of domestic and sexual violence, and how those who tried to say something were screamed down, and by whom? When they understand the choice to silence even the women who pointed to these lies, and the fact that women like Karen Straughan and Alison Tieman had to use pseudonyms for years to be safe? When they understand why they are not trusted, as the message sent in their name was, they thought it was fine for them to do, what men were monsters if they did? When they understand who drove Earl Silverman and Elizabeth Hayes to suicide https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LOhcB01pqxw because they dared speak of their own experience and point to the lies.
When young women understand that this was a choice to blame all men while writing female predators a pass? When they appreciate their elders could and should have seen this, and today are pretending nothing happened, or worse, that it is up to the young to fix their own problems, when these were pushed upon them? When they read what Hoff Summers, among many, said decades ago, and how it was promptly ignored, what should they think? Who should they blame? Should they not conclude they were set up, and gaslighted? Should they not be furious with their elders who denied there was a problem, then lied to them about what it was, and then told them they should fix it, while refusing to find their own voice, and as such ensure that the mainstream media would not cover it? When they understand that their mothers did not want to work either https://archive.ph/JTzBQ, but said nothing just slowly stopped encouraging the telling of the lie (remember that survey is now over a decade old)?
When young women understand the harm to boys education was long ago understood, and one of the reasons he could not support a family if he wanted to, can be seen as concrete choice? When they understand the choice to discuss this in terms of harms to women, where the alienation was already well underway, and was quite understood? Young women should believe this was not a lot of self-serving bs at their expense, and a mess that they are now left with? When they look at the reputation of women with their peer men their mothers inherited and compare it to the one they receive?
When young women understand their peer men can and do make the argument that women have supported abuse by women, and because of their mothers generations choices, they can only argue they personally do not? Where their mothers would never have faced such an argument, and had they unlike young men today, there would have been no evidence to make it, as opposed to a mountain of it.
It is not that the hysteria overtook society, it is how we are dealing with it. Young women have a right to expect their elders to own they were wrong, to have their elders openly acknowledge that the narratives were misguided. To have their elders acknowledge that men would be correct to not trust the agencies that denied the possibility there could be abusive women, to be a part of, let alone lead in the area of domestic violence. Same with sexual violence.
Yet young women are often being silenced and still having to fight their elders where the truth is beyond clear, and even when their elders see it, they too often merely fall into silence… so as the social harms grow, can they blame their peer men for not trusting where they too see the hate that was pushed? That seems to be what they are being encouraged to do, as those who pushed the hate try to pretend they have no responsibility. The young women who see are reaching critical mass. Many are finding ways to build trust on a personal level with young men, many are not, because they do not know how to open the discussion. However, those men and women know who placed barriers to trust. They see those very people, will soon be demanding pensions from the young whose lives they have derailed, from the young men whose education they promoted harm to, who they told abuse and harm to them were things to be celebrated, and from the young women, whose choices and trust they set alight for fun.
I would ask, what should we expect from the young who see? As they see we expect them to pay for their elders, where trust was so badly betrayed?
evenhandedblog 