Glenn Debates DART Campaign on CNN--Is There a 'War on Women'?
November 6th, 2008 by Glenn Sacks, MA for Fathers & Families
I debated our campaign against anti-father Dallas bus ads on CNN's Issues with Jane Velez-Mitchell yesterday afternoon. Velez-Mitchell is a passionate women's advocate who framed the issue in terms of what she called "The War Against Women."
Many of the claims in the parade of women-as-victim stats are questionable, as are many of the domestic violence establishment's claims about violence against women.
To learn more about some of the research I discussed, click here, then click on "To depict only males as perpetrators of domestic violence..."
To watch the debate, click here or see below. To learn more about our campaign and to join us, click here.
[BTW, I was ID'd on the show as "The spokesperson for Fathers & Families," which isn't quite accurate--I've worked with Fathers & Families on this campaign and others, but I'm not their spokesperson.]
"));
19 queries. 0.442 seconds.
November 6th, 2008 at 2:56 am
Sometimes I really question the stereotype of women being nurturing and compassionate, I agree with Jason on the rape part. I wish people had to be held accountable for their statistics when on the air, when I left my school in May they still had the 1 in 4 women will be raped stat from the 70s by whatever woman's group, with who know what the sample population was.
November 6th, 2008 at 4:21 am
She brought up rape because it pushes more buttons than domestic violence, gets people angrier and therefore thinking less clearly. Note that not only did she mention it personally but most of the graphics went on about rape rather than DV, which suggests either the person who puts up the graphics cant tell the difference between rape and DV or that it was pre-planned, again because rape pushes more buttons than DV, and perhaps also because it is a far more male dominated crime than DV.
Perhaps she asked Glenn if he had been a victim in the hope that if he said yes she could dismiss it as a personal vendetta by one of the “rare” male victims.
“40 percent of girls claim they know someone who has been abused by their boyfriend” A pointless figure as they could all know the same one girl.
“The war against women”
Let’s hope a similar war is soon launched against men- we need all the help we can get.
November 6th, 2008 at 4:38 am
Keep it real Mitchell.
Glenn and the pit bull reporter are both in the media. They both report on ISSUES to the people. It is their call in life. Her question as to why Glenn has any problem with this is WAY OUT OF LINE! Who is she, she can report on things that she has not personal attachment to when she reports, but somehow it is wrong for Glenn to do the same.
If she was a good reporter she would have visited Glenn's site and she would have understood that it was only two of the three ads. She posts the two with the girls on them, first. Technical editing allowed her to ad the boys sign later to cover her butt.
Rape became and issue but only when women are the victim. If it's a 13 year old boy, it's not rape. Women do rape.
Kids are more influenced by the direct domestic violence perpetrated against them, than watching their father beat their mother, boyfriend beating their mother, or a PUBLIC funded bus ad. But that isn't the issue according to Miss Right. In the opening statement, pay attention to her pronunciation of the KIDS!
These ads are designed to get our attention. They have gotten our attention. She would call it a succesful ad campaign. 9/11 was designed to get our attention. It got our attention. So would she call that a succesful campaign? It doesn't matter who gets hurt in the process? The end justifies the means?
None of the ads say anything about rape. The ad with the boy says I will grow up and beat my wife. It doesn't say I will grow up and rape my wife. But again the end justifies the means.
She states that men are physically bigger than the women. In the 1950s that was true. But times change, diets change, work ethics change. Here where I live, the women have a tendency to be bigger than the men. The men work and the women don't, they stay home, watch soaps, eat bonbons, and collect child support. We don't have a hooters, we have a heifers. (I've been dying to say that.) Obesity is alive and kicking in my neck of the woods. You would have to walk around town, or check the online dating sites to verify that what I say is true. I've known many men to be victims of DV, and they have told me in private. But they would never admit it in public.
Glenn, I think that you did an OUTSTANDING JOB. I wouldn't change a thing. She was lively, raised her voice, denied the truth about statistics that are real and verifiable. I'd say you won that debate. Thank you.
It's FatherTime.
November 6th, 2008 at 5:01 am
War on women?
When you watch the video the words at the bottom ask that question.
How is this a war on women? This is about gender bias in advertising. We are not attacking women. We are attacking an unfair, biased ad campaign. We don't deny DV. We don't approve of rape. We do not approve or condone child abuse either, but she tries to sidestep that issue.
Twisted.
November 6th, 2008 at 6:18 am
Well done, Glenn.
I think this woman gets what we're all saying about those ads. But like so many of the other women who oppose this campaign, she's in denial. She's in denial about the facts, or she's just interested in statistics that reaffirm her beliefs, and to hell with the rest that challenge those beliefs.
I think Glenn did an excellent job of keeping her on the defensive. Domestic Violence in this day and age is hardly always a female issue only.
November 6th, 2008 at 6:31 am
That is just part of the issue as well, domestic violence doesn't necessarily just mean physical attacks.
November 6th, 2008 at 7:01 am
Good job Glenn. The DV machine is spinning rape/sexual violence very hard now. The funding for DV is not what it was, but if you throw rape/sexual violence services in with DV, more victims=more money. This started a while back, but it is becoming more apparent. Once again, this is something I saw with my ex-wife and the DV shelter that she runs. She had problems with the State Attorney's office in the area because she was promoting her shelter as a "Certified Sexual Violence Center," when in fact it was not. She had conned a doctor into endorsing the center, but she did not have the right forensic collection kits. All to get more funding. But, "rape" is the new DV word of the moment.
As far as the interview, notice how loud and over the top she was? Why? Glenn gave good solid answers. She really thought she had a debate going, but I thought she was weak at best. Keep up the good work Glenn.
November 6th, 2008 at 7:07 am
as long as men are put on the defensive and voluntarily stay there, no changes of significance will be accomplished.
November 6th, 2008 at 7:09 am
WOW WOW WOW!!!
Glenn, you did a great job!! Glenn, you did a great job!! Mrs. Velez clearly started the piece with a chip on her shoulder blindly repeating the feminist mantra that women are the Universal Victim™.
She clearly had the estrogen and ignorance necessary to shut you down and kick you butt on her show. You stood your ground and clearly and calmly articulated a reasonable position. You picked her apart.
At the beginning of the piece she was 100% against you before you even said a word, and by the end of the piece she was agreeing with you.
I am finding it hard to believe that the CNN piece is real. I cannot ever remember seeing a woman actually come to a rational conclusion about the topic of DV. Please tell me the video clip is real and not staged ;-)
WOW!
November 6th, 2008 at 7:14 am
to vanquish a snake, the head is cut off. unless men stop living their entire lives for the enjoyment of and the benefit of women as though they are the only reason we walk the planet and are allowed breath, nothing will ever change.
glenn was balanced, she was biased. should it not have been the other way around?
November 6th, 2008 at 7:27 am
The number of men raped in prison is pretty close to the number of women raped outside of prison. Rape is a male issue too. We should bring it up when women try and play the greater victim card.
Compound that with the fact that a good percentage of male prisoners are there on false accusations.
Women have blood on their hands too. The days of giving women a moral superiority pass are over. Glenn did a great job of that in this appearance.
November 6th, 2008 at 7:27 am
I noticed that every time Glenn countered her with facts she would change the subject to something different. It reminds me of jeanna on this blog. As soon as you counter there arguement they change the talking point to something else. Once you have countered that point they change to a different talking point. It's slinging mud hoping something will stick.
At the end this lady says she is keeping it real? On what planet? No wonder I never watch CNN. This lady must be the new tabloid queen behind Nancy Grace.
November 6th, 2008 at 7:58 am
Great job on the show Glenn. Pathetic how some people will try and justify their unethical behavior. The ends cannot justify the means for the simple reason that the ends produced are a result of the means.
November 6th, 2008 at 8:32 am
Good job Glenn. You kept your cool, as it was clear this reporter is deliberately obtuse about DV.
Glenn, I experienced a physiological reaction to Jane's comment, "women don't rape". Women do in fact rape; an older sister raped me and despite being robust, it has influenced me greatly.
And there are little if any resources available to me despite being a more common phenomenon that anyone knows - there are no stats or studies of any kind therefore it isn't happening according to feminists or Jane - It is however for men to accuse other men ; that's ok and good but not a woman - Oh no. In fact I had one psychologist (hospital) say that my issues regarding being sexually abused by a women was a con - which I am not - but then again she is a devout feminist so ... I am after her license.
It did not destroy my life completely as is often the case with many women (much of which is Bs.) but it did 'set' me up for PTSD later in life after two stints in the military, being estranged from my son ( almost 20 years and counting), bankrupted twice via false accusation after false accusation and most of all being subjected to the vicious tentacles of feminist propaganda via the corrupt Just-Us system. I had one moving violation in twenty years Glenn - that is the extent of my involvement in criminal activity - Yet 20 years ago I was parallel to Charlie Manson - Guess who has the criminal record as long as your arm - Mommy Dearest that's who. Guess who has severe behavioral problems ... the child; our son, whom I still adore to this day ... wherever he is.
Women can be and are equally vicious and vile abusers in comparison to men.
Women do rape and sexually too Jane.
Moreover, Jane DV will not be resolved until there is a scintilla of honesty brought to bear.
Good works Glenn. Thank-you.
November 6th, 2008 at 8:51 am
Great job Glenn! It's not easy being interrupted like that over and over and staying cool.
She just kept changing the subject and interrupting you every chance she had.
Rape wasn't even the issue, but if "women don't rape" then why are 3 out of 4 homeless boys in British Columbia molested by women?
http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=604d29af-5999-47ec-a156-0f5bc96954f2
In South Africa, it's 2 out of 5 male students who were molested by women. http://www.canada.com/montrealgazette/news/story.html?id=ad3524cc-6076-4bc2-a015-23860553bd04
A student survey showed 43% of teacher sex abuse comes from female teachers but over 90% of prosecutions are of male teachers. http://www.newsobserver.com/672/story/501955.html
And yes, adult women do rape adult men. http://allafrica.com/stories/200708210872.html
In Australia, one in five male sex abuse victims were victimized by women.
http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,24541007-23272,00.html
Men are also frequently victims of “sexual coercion” by women as well as by other men. (Sexuality and Culture, Summer 2000.) According to a May 2008 study by the University of New Hampshire, 28% of college women and 11% of college men experienced unwanted sexual contact and the perpetrator was a member of the opposite sex 98% of the time for girls and 91% of the time for boys. See Table 1 at http://www.unh.edu/news/docs/2006unwantedsexualexperiences.pdf
November 6th, 2008 at 9:23 am
...typical. Once Glenn starts pointing out facts, he is shouted down by the host, who is just pushing the usual domestic violence template of men always bad/women always good...
November 6th, 2008 at 10:20 am
Glenn says: Three decades of domestic violence research shows that women are as likely to attack men as vice versa. Feminist Kool Aid Advocate interupts with: Yea but they, they, they, un uh.... Ah Ah.
This is femineez for: What your saying is true but it doesn't help my arguement and I don't like it. Only men beat and kill women and there is clearly no evidence that a woman has ever killed a pregnant man.
Do to watching this lady everyone please deduct 3 I.Q. points from your previous score.
November 6th, 2008 at 10:34 am
Glenn, wonderful job as usual.
What I noticed though was that the point of your campaign was completely lost on her.
She could not care less about the fact the campaign is biased and seemed unwilling to acknowledge there might be a problem with lying and misrepresenting facts. I guess she's a typical media person - don't bother her with facts.
November 6th, 2008 at 10:43 am
Oh... the second study is even worse than I thought, I forgot to note this part:
"They investigated the deaths of women who died while pregnant or within a year of being pregnant"
So they included women who died a year AFTER being pregnant and included them in the states for deaths associated with pregnancy.
And they STILL has to cut out complications due to pregnancy in order to make the claim they wanted to make.
I think it is fairly safe to say that women aren't dying in great numbers due to complications of their pregnancy three months after the baby is born... and certainly not a year later.
November 6th, 2008 at 10:47 am
Mister-M Says:
November 6th, 2008 at 9:43 am
David M. wrote: I noticed that every time Glenn countered her with facts she would change the subject to something different. It reminds me of jeanna on this blog. As soon as you counter there arguement they change the talking point to something else. Once you have countered that point they change to a different talking point. It's slinging mud hoping something will stick.
Actually, it reminds me of debate and discussion with most women (not all) on any number of topics. When you cut through the periphery and get right down to the heart of the matter, and it challenges their line of thinking - it's about deflection and redirection - not staying on point. Usually, if this is occurring face-to-face, it's accompanied by escalating volume and physical gesturing, too
_____________________________________
Mister -M, Exactly. I have several times encountered exactly this same thing. My conclusion is that most women (not all) have been so brainwashed that they are to always be right no matter what the facts state. When you give them facts they are not typically open to saying "good point" or "I didn't realize that" or "let me check into that" or the one I've never heard " I'm sorry I was wrong about the facts."
Confronted with facts they scramble to different talking points hoping to be right about something. Also, you can refute 5 arguements of most women (not all), and if you can't immediately counter the 6th arguement they feel they have won, even if they couldn't support their other 5 talking points.
November 6th, 2008 at 10:56 am
Rape hysteria is always the womens silver bullet. If the public was fed the truth about the true percentages of false rape accussations (it's not 2%), instaed of rape hysteria, we would be disgusted at these women!!
November 6th, 2008 at 11:10 am
Did anyone notice the fishing for a way to humiliate Glenn?
The host had such a curious mind about Glenn's motivations behind supporting fathers rights. Maybe she suffered from domestic violence which is why she was so passionate about it? Or maybe .. just maybe men are NOT to be the beneficiaries of humanitarian compassion?
Glenn in the future, you might want to reserve your commenting time explicitly - and make it clear that you not be interrupted and the host not be rude and start speaking while you are still talking. Be it a small interval - it still must be an unadulterated time to get your words out.
"You had your turn to speak and I did not interject your words - now it is my turn, so would you kindly return the favor?" would be a nice quote to have
November 6th, 2008 at 11:41 am
Unfortunately, TV news these days is anything BUT news. It is about entertainment and ratings. As Glenn mentions in his blog, the "conversation" took place in the afternoon. Who is more likely to be at home during that time to watch? Need I say more.
Kudos Glenn for stepping up and giving it your best. Unfortunately - and not unlike most fathers/men these days - you were battling an uphill battles before the segment even started.
November 6th, 2008 at 12:12 pm
Jason said: "I think it is fairly safe to say that women aren't dying in great numbers due to complications of their pregnancy three months after the baby is born... and certainly not a year later."
Not to put too fine a point on it, but I'm not so sure about this - you're going out on a limb here. Complications due to pregnancy-induced diabetes, post-partum depression, etc., are all present long after delivery.
November 6th, 2008 at 12:22 pm
Congratulations, Glenn! First for getting on the show in the first place (a tribute to your years of working with integrity in this area), and second for doing a good job in a difficult environment.
Thank you for the work you are doing.
November 6th, 2008 at 12:24 pm
Mr Bad,
While these things do exist and I actually know a woman who endured pregnancy induced diabetes (not a good situation at all)... these are a minority of cases.
I'd be surprised if a significant number of complication related deaths took place months after the birth of the child.
If you have numbers showing otherwise I am definetely open to being corrected on this though.
November 6th, 2008 at 1:12 pm
"That 100% of these homicides are the result of violence from the man who impregnated her"
Its called spin...
Here is how radical feminist propaganda to young women goes
1. All men are rapists (and you should treat them as if they already raped someone)
2. 15 out of 3 women (inversion intentional to point out the ridiculous nature) are raped in their life time (i.e. YOU will be raped!..... are you afraid of men enough to avoid them all? No?! Let me try some more scary statistics)
3. Rape has many forms... including things like later regrets (i.e. We told you not to sleep with men, but you still did - alright you can change your mind about consensual sex and make it into rape)
4. Society conditions women to accept rape as regular part of life (i.e. You may not believe heterosexual sex is rape, but for us it is and that is what matters)
5. 14 out of 4 women suffer domestic violence from their domestic partner (i.e. merge roommates (females included), lesbian partners etc. with husbands) - (So you did not listen to us and married a man - now you are going to get it.... are you scared yet enough to divorce your husband?)
6. Most common form of DV is financial and emotional (Maybe you ought to start interpreting fiscal sanity and what you feel as DV. That should help your divorce decision.)
7. Leading cause of death of pregnant women is homicide by the father of the child (You got pregnant - now you are definitely going to get it... are you scared yet? Leave the man now, atone for your sins against the radical feminist goddess)
8. Child support is really for the child (Make that man pay - you deviated from the radical feminist goddess, now make a sacrifice to atone for your sin by leeching the man)
I am surprised that more women choose to associate with men - after this detailed propaganda campaign..
November 6th, 2008 at 1:19 pm
Laurie,
"Does anyone have any contact information for Ms. Velez Mitchell? I would like to write to her and let her know what I thought of her one-sided interview."
I actually wrote to CNN last night about it... but in relation to her comment that women are never rapists and that it is a biological fact.
I went to this link:
http://www.cnn.com/feedback/
And then went to what I thought was the appropriate section which was "Headline News".
I'm not sure if that was the correct location, but that is who I ended up writing to.
November 6th, 2008 at 1:39 pm
I haven't read all the comments here (I'm just out of bed and still working on my fisrt cuppa)... but I played the clip with our room mate (female) watching nearby and we BOTH noticed how Jane would ask a question and as soon as it became clear she did not approve of Glenns resposne who would talk over him and rephrase the question or try to change the topic (it's called ' bifurcating ').
What I got a kick out of is at the end of the clip roomie says (and remember, roomie is a gurl) "I really wish Glenn would have told her to shut the fook up so he could answer her question".
But I did notice, this is the same treatment Alec Baldwin was subjected to on The View. Hit with questions faster than he could answer them, question twisted when they didn't like his answers, ducking to commercials and then the ultimate trump: "we're out of time, thank you for coming" ... in other words this was a dog and pony show so they could later say "we gave a man his chance to talk and he didn't say anything" (noooooo, he didn't... because you wouldn't shut the fook up long enough to let him answer you!!!).
I'll have more to say later when I've read the comments here.
Gunner Retired.
November 6th, 2008 at 2:00 pm
Gelnn:
That was a really good performance on your part; I think you handled it perfectly.
I found it interesting that when you challenged her statistics, she tried a flat denial once then gave up and tried to shout you down in other ways ("women don't rape").
One possible reply to "women don't rape" is "men don't falsely accuse of rape, and women do", although that would not have flown in that environment and driven the discussion further afield.
I was glad that at the end of the segment she didn't try to dimiss you or your message (she wasn't rolling her eyes at you, which is where I thought she was going).
I was left with the feeling that she respected your arguments.
I'm at a loss to add that all up. She sure tried some dirty tricks in the middle.
November 6th, 2008 at 2:10 pm
"Jason Says:
November 6th, 2008 at 1:49 pm
Offended_Dad,
Actually she went one step further than saying that women do not rape.
She indicated that they were biologically incapable of rape.
Her wording went something like this: "Women do not rape... it's a biological fact"
Well... I remember several years ago I drank too much wine and passed out. the woman I was dating at the time told me in the morning she had a lot of fun while I was asleep. Apparently an important part stayed at attention and did his job.
Was that rape? I was passed out and did not give consent.
November 6th, 2008 at 2:23 pm
Jason -yes...
A feminist would claim if the sexes were reversed "IT IS RAPE!". When the reality of the situation is more subtle.
Also.... since I did not consent, or choose to participate, it is clear that a woman can rape a man... even if the man is stronger.
November 6th, 2008 at 2:46 pm
Jason, I agree that the 'researchers' involved in that report seemed to be endeavoring to 'prove' a foregone conclusion. I just want ensure that we MRAs don't stoop to their level, that's all.
November 6th, 2008 at 2:48 pm
The day is coming. The day when all of the false assertions ever uttered by feminists will be publicly challenged, refuted by other better informed evidences and held accountable.
Accountability to feminists for decades of all of the false, deliberately misleading, freedom suppressing, population dividing, hate fomenting, false accusing and greedy self worship and monetary gain through all of the above is the next measure in line to balance the notion of social justice.
That so many people have lied to themselves and then mostly to the majority of others and gained so much social prestige and monetary gain from delusion is beyond unconscionable and perhaps even bordering on criminal. Our cultures have been robbed and led into a moral abyss by the fraudulence of this global social distraction.
November 6th, 2008 at 3:03 pm
Ok, I watched it. Excellent job Glenn.
Also, she did a pretty good job of backpedalling a bit and showing respect for your data.
Very effective. I could not have handled that argument anywhere as effectively.
Your balanced tit-for-tat overspeak of her came across as necessary but planned and respectful. I would have told her to hush!
November 6th, 2008 at 4:08 pm
She just responded to me. I sent her two emails using the one someone posed above. In one, I gave her data on female rape perpetrators. In another, I gave her DV data.
I just got a reply from her on the rape email and she said:
"You make a good point and when the issue comes up again I will try to incorporate it!
Thanks for taking the time.
Best,
Jane
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T"
November 6th, 2008 at 5:18 pm
It is going to take support of level headed women who actually love men as human beings to get any sort of awareness. I really doubt that the feminist movement didn't involve men on their side as well, now they have money that is steadily coming in due to fabricated statistics and sensationalized scare tactics.
I bet f the tax-payer money that supports woman's groups weren't threatened, there would more inclination to listen and read governmental statistics from this decade.
I read somewhere that the organizational system of the average female's memory is based at least partly on the strongest emotions first in a descending pattern and male's memory is at least partly based on spatial or chronological order with most recent or nearest object first. Not sure of the source, maybe one of those Mars and Venus books?
So in the female mind I guess the strongest threat emotions would most likely be remembered or organized by themselves --> children -->men.
Male mind may be Now --> last year--> own lifetime, I don't know I need sleep.
November 6th, 2008 at 5:55 pm
Jason, on debunking that study- brilliant, bloody brilliant.
Pankaj Says:
The host had such a curious mind about Glenn's motivations behind supporting fathers rights. Maybe she suffered from domestic violence which is why she was so passionate about it?
According to IMDB she is a recovering alcoholic, which statistically makes her more likely than most to have been a victim and/or perpetrator of Dv.
November 6th, 2008 at 7:23 pm
Wow I finally had the chance to watch that vid and Glenn almost didn't have to speak. She basically owned herself. From the get go she intentionally left out the ad with the little boy and pulled a switcheroo by throwing in the ad about youth suicide, you know, the one that no is complaining about?
Her intent wasn't to find out what Glenn and the campaign were about. Her intent was to make Glenn look bad.
Long gone are the days when the point of the news was to give information and let the viewer draw the conclusion...
November 6th, 2008 at 7:43 pm
Marc A. Says:
November 6th, 2008 at 4:08 pm
She just responded to me. I sent her two emails using the one someone posed above. In one, I gave her data on female rape perpetrators. In another, I gave her DV data.
I just got a reply from her on the rape email and she said:
"You make a good point and when the issue comes up again I will try to incorporate it!
Thanks for taking the time.
Best,
Jane
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T"
Thanks for sending Jane an email Marc.
Thank-you.
And since Jane is very interested is bringing attention to the issue of vile Domestic Violence then perhaps Glenn and yourself will be asked back soon, n'est pas ? Perhaps set aside a few more minutes than 6 or so - it is important after all; besides she needs the ratings since the move.
November 6th, 2008 at 7:57 pm
I just watched it. God what an airhead. Glenn did a great job dealing with this overgrown toddler.
And "the problem" isn't domestic violence. Domestic violence is a VERY minor factor in the lives of children. The real problem is that children are growing up without the security and discipline that only comes from living with their father. Domestic violence is one of the most overhyped issues in America.
November 6th, 2008 at 9:02 pm
Jane Velez-Mitchell was looking for a personal angle from Glenn. Like it or not guys, women like to relate to personal stories over statistics and facts. I myself prefer that approach for no other reason than that's probably the way my brain is hard wired.
However, if you guys ever want to reach female audiences and make them understand your situations and your grievances you are going to have to learn how to communicate more in their preferred style which is with the personal rather than the political, the scientific, the mathematical, etc.
Which means more use of real people and personal situations, examples of male victims with some appearing in person in the MSM. I know this tends to run against men's natural inclination to dislike being labeled a victim but I believe women need to see actual victims in order to believe and process the information rather than just hearing about nameless and faceless numbers.
I believe that is the reason this woman asked Glenn if he'd had an experience with DV. I don't think she was intimating that unless he experienced it himself, he was not qualified to talk about it. She just wanted a sort of picture drawn for her and her female audience members.
November 6th, 2008 at 9:10 pm
Rest assured that the question as to whether Glenn had been a victim or not would have been morphed into him being a weakling had he answered in the positive.
November 6th, 2008 at 9:27 pm
MisterM,
Did you happen to catch Alec Baldwins appearance on 'The View' discussing PAS? He got the same treatment.
GR
November 6th, 2008 at 9:40 pm
Perspicacious,
While I agree with some of what you have said, I would like to point out that men who have been victimized are not beings that draw sympathy from most people... including women.
As a matter of fact, they are more often ridiculed than anything else.
It is a sad but true irony.
If a man is portrayed as being weak he is not deemed worthy of aid or sympathy... if a man is portrayed as being strong he is not deemed to need aid or sympathy.
Aid and sympathy is mostly reserved for women and children... I'm still trying to figure out a way to resolve this issue.
A good example is to consider how homeless men are treated by society... people know they need help, people know they exist... but they are continually mocked and shamed by society with very little sympathy going their way.
I mean, these are real people in real situations... when you see a man laying on the sidewalk in a bunch of tattered rags how can it be anything but a personal story?... but how many women do you know that walk up to homeless people in order to help them out?
I'm with Gwallan on this... if Glenn has answered in the affirmative it would have been twisted in a way so as to discredit his position.
November 6th, 2008 at 9:43 pm
@perspicacious...
Sorry but this should have been part of my previous.
I did try to relate specifics of my personal experiences when I was a bit younger. I learned not to in a hurry.
Women are complete and utter voyeurs. All the dirt and salaciouness MUST be exposed and in the greatest possible detail else I won't be believed to begin with.
Why should I as a victim be expected to satisfy their need for all the gory details? No you DO NOT get to be in the room watching as it happened. Go perve somewhere else.
November 6th, 2008 at 9:56 pm
@Jason...
One thing that always frustrates me is those folk, particularly women, who try to lecture me about the attitudes toward male victims.
I'll sum up the reality thus...
A crying woman is a call to arms. A crying man is an object of disgust and derision.
November 6th, 2008 at 10:08 pm
Jason Says:
November 6th, 2008 at 9:40 pm
Perspicacious,
While I agree with some of what you have said, I would like to point out that men who have been victimized are not beings that draw sympathy from most people... including women.
As a matter of fact, they are more often ridiculed than anything else.
It is a sad but true irony.
If a man is portrayed as being weak he is not deemed worthy of aid or sympathy... if a man is portrayed as being strong he is not deemed to need aid or sympathy.
___________________________
Yes, I know and appreciate that men are in a Catch-22 in this situation (like so many others). However, men need to figure some way to speak to women in women's native tongue which is The Personal versus Logic and Facts. If men don't find a way to bridge that communication difference, women will never hear what men are actually saying. Some won't hear because they don't want to but others just plain won't be able to get it.
I hesitated to say this before and actually deleted it twice because not only would Jeana be in a tizzy but Glenn himself would probably delete it but here goes:
Women tend to think a lot like children...yes, even me...another True Confession of mine. Children relate better to personal stories and analogies and they like to talk about personal stories. Children like to see a lot of pictures (as do women--just pick up *any* woman's magazine in the check out lane at the grocery store). Most children can't relate well to stats and facts and references.
Would you try to communicate with a child about what is wrong with XYZ by giving the child a lot of statistics and percentages or would you be more successful by telling the child a story about XYZ as it relates to the world around him?
Glenn, before you delete this I just want to add that men and women's brains are wired differently. Scientists have shown this in many experiments. That women think more like children isn't meant to be a put down by me--especially since I admit I am "guilty" of the same type of thinking process. In fact, there are many up sides to the way women think and communicate just as there are up sides to the way men think and communicate.
It all goes back to what I said earlier. Men and women are biologically different and ignoring these differences--the way feminists insist we must do--leads to a multitude of the problems we are dealing with today.
November 6th, 2008 at 10:20 pm
gwallan Says:
November 6th, 2008 at 9:43 pm
@perspicacious...
Sorry but this should have been part of my previous.
I did try to relate specifics of my personal experiences when I was a bit younger. I learned not to in a hurry.
_________________________
I can understand why. However, it doesn't have to be a true personal story of your life. You can talk to women with sons about what can and probably will happen to their son in such and such a situation.
I know many women with sons here act as though they don't care..."not happening to my little boy" and so on. But I truly believe a lot of that is just false bravado. I have to believe that most feminists who have sons really do love their sons. I can't bear to think the opposite.
I really believe most mothers whether feminists or not are concerned about their sons. Just look at some of the letters Glenn posts from mothers of grown sons who are being falsely accused, roped into paying CS while being unable to see their child, and so on.
Creating a story line for the purposes of providing a pictorial example that involves a woman having to put her son and her self in the line of fire might be helpful. The one thing I'm sure of is that providing women with stats, percentages, references isn't, for the most part working to persuade women there even is a problem.
November 6th, 2008 at 10:34 pm
You missed a great opportunity to talk about the woman that got mandatory sentencing in Florida for having sex with a minor. Is that rape? What about all the teachers having sex with little boys?
November 6th, 2008 at 10:36 pm
perspicacious,
Feminists of the radical kind have disowned/spurned their own daughters for not sticking with their ideologies and associating with men - there is at least one known and clear example of this. I am not sure they will spurn ideologies or even entertain the thought that their ideology is hurting their son. For the damage is not visible until much later. And that you can see in most mothers - they realize the damage was done after it already has taken its toll. This is not to mean that I am blaming mothers - fathers too engage in these kinds of behaviors - simply due to lack of parenting skills.
What can we do about it? Teach parents to rethink/re-examine/reevaluate how they are raising their sons.. and rectify any patterns that promote male disposability or indicate male inferiority (and a surprising number of moms engage in this - blind due to general bio-evolutionary bias against men).
November 6th, 2008 at 10:40 pm
Perspicacious,
"However, men need to figure some way to speak to women in women's native tongue which is The Personal versus Logic and Facts. If men don't find a way to bridge that communication difference, women will never hear what men are actually saying. Some won't hear because they don't want to but others just plain won't be able to get it."
The way is actually exactly what Glenn did.
Weak men are not sympathetic beings, nor to they garner a womans respect... hence the fact that they request aid will often fall upon deaf ears.
Strong men are not sympathetic beings... but they do garner a womans respect. At the same time they cannot request aid because it is obvious that they do not need it.
A strong man who garners a womans respect however can advocate for aid and help for weaker men.
I hate using the terms strong and weak here... so let me put it a different way.
Men who are victims of domestic violence can never request aid from women because by definition they will be considered objects of disdain for having been victimised in the first place.
However... men who have not been victims of domestic violence can call attention to the problem and try to resolve it that way.
Unfortinately men aren't necessarily that great about looking out for one another, it is a byproduct of having to compete against one another.
The sooner men begin to work together for the improvement of the lives of other men the better.
The most effective strategy would actually be to have someone like a sports star or other "manly man" come out in support of men who are down and out.
Women do not hear the cries of the homeless because they are too low in social status to bother listening to... women are attuned to men of high social status... those are the ones they will pay attention to.
November 7th, 2008 at 12:57 am
@Perspicacious...
Hah, I'm currently telling parents to keep their sons away from any woman diagnosed depressive because while it may not make them rape those sons it certainly will be grounds for them to escape punishment when they do. In Australia this has some context.
One day I'll give you a dissertation on the responses individuals have to female committed sex offences. I've had decades to learn about this and it ain't a pretty picture. Take my word for it that womens responses are downright creepy at times. Remember how Oprah treats female "celebrity" rapists? She gives her audience exactly what they want. They applaud those rapists shamelessly. You go girl.
Pity that "bravado" doesn't result in sufficient bravery to call their lying sisters to order.
The only women in my experience who DO have strong negative reactions are those with sons. Without a close tie to the harmed male the rest of the female population doesn't give two hoots and many will even cheer. When Ester Vilar warned about giving women any say in men's welfare this is reason number one.
Unfortunately this concern never extends to other womens sons. I've mentioned an Australian story involving a US woman who chatted up a fourteen year old over the internet. Her trip to this land to consumate that grooming was paid for by half a million Australian women, many of them mothers I'm sure, who lapped it up as a cutesy love story. He's somebody else's son as far as those half million sponsors are concerned. The mother of that boy hasn't really seen her son since his sixteenth birthday. I wonder what THAT mother thinks of her Australian sisters?
So when MLK talked about "injustice anywhere" that message was only comprehensible to men?
I doubt that the use of stats is the problem. Statistics seem to be very effective with female audiences when they reference female victims only. Maybe the trick is to use dishonest hyperbolic ones. Hmmmm.....
November 7th, 2008 at 2:23 am
I find that Valez-Mitchell's whole manner of arguing was quite rude and objectionable. Particularly when she interrupted Glenn with "were you a victim of domestic violence?".
If someone is making a considered statement on an issue, then it is offensive to interrupt with a claim essentially designed to white-ant the person by implying that they are motivated solely by some personal grudge. Especially when there is clearly no basis to the insinuation.
Her whole manner is typical of a lot of women I have come across who tend to be somewhat bossy and obtuse, and have been conditioned by our current culture to always believe they are morally in the right.
November 7th, 2008 at 2:30 am
"Glenn: “What if there was an ad where a little girl says one day my mom will kill me how would you feel about that ad?”
Glenn: “The vast majority of parental murders of children are done by mothers and not fathers.”
Jane Velez-Mitchell: “I am not concerned about ads.” "
___________________________________________________
Nice dodge of the issue there Jane.
Previously, she justified these ads as being necessary to draw attention to a serious issue. Yet when cornered on whether she would be okay with the same shock and awe tactics being used to draw attention to women's misdeeds, she ducks the issue.
It's so typical of feminists that this kind of glib, hypocritical rhetoric just rolls off their tongue.
November 7th, 2008 at 3:04 am
perspicacious Says: "However, if you guys ever want to reach female audiences and make them understand your situations and your grievances you are going to have to learn how to communicate more in their preferred style which is with the personal rather than the political, the scientific, the mathematical, etc. "
I find it quite odd that you should mention that, because as a 6'3" 250lb male when I mention that my 5'5" 165lb ex-wife battered me for 7 years, then shortly after our separation raped me in a manner that fully satisfies the legal statute definition of forcible sexual assault...
The response I typically get get is either "hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha, yeah right" or "oh that's impossible, how could a woman so much smaller than you do such a thing?"
When I reported it to the police (an hour or so after the event, prior to seeking medical attention) their response was simply "what are you complaining about, you got laid didn't you? Are you gay?" (this was summer 1994, I didn't speak of it again for almost a decade).
Now about that "in their preferred style which is with the personal"???
Gunner Retired
November 7th, 2008 at 8:43 am
Perspicacious' has a point. More women than not are interested in experiences that appeal to their emotions rather than cold hard fact.
That's just the way it is, and its counter productive to continue arguing about the "irrationality of women" etc.
I also don't believe that most mothers, even feminist mothers, don't love their sons. Many women can attest to what I'm about to say. Many feminist women who read this blog will have my neck for what I'm about to say, but having my two children (both boys) was THE most beautiful and profound experience of my life.
Giving birth is the essense of womanhood as it affects you in such a monumental way. That is not to say our only worth is to be childbearers, but it is a BIG part of who we are. I can not imagine that the majority of any group of women who have carried a child and given birth to that child not having the same profound feelings. Well, I guess I could, but its hard.
More women than not are emotional creatures. That's just how it is and that's fine. In order to get women to understand you have to appeal to her emotions. We have seen that many prominent female feminists couldn't give a rat's behind about "facts". And probably they never will because at the end of the day, they dont seek truth and justice. Its as if they want women to remain in a perpetual state of victimhood.
Average, everyday women though ... who may sympathise but are not hung up on the feminist cause ... may be more receptive, but once again they may not appreciate hard, cold facts in like manner such as P, myself, Celia, Betsy and the other women who support you here. I'm positive that if men were given a voice with the same freedom women are given on shows like Oprah you would stir up the emotions of many reasonable women who will see that what you ask for is not so unfair or far-fetched after all.
Just a few months ago, I started to gradually introduce men's issues to the ladies in my book club and though many of them still hold certain conventional, though debunked, beliefs about men and women, they're certainly not afraid to question their beliefs about he other side of the coin. Some of them have even started to visit Glenn's blog. I've also noticed that a couple of them have posted positive comments in support of what is discussed here.
Anyhow, all that being said, I also have to admit Jason makes a good point that society reacts to violence against men with triviality and indifference. And many women have been conditioned to think that men are never victims ... or if they are, it doesn't matter since they're victims of other men and thereby proves the feminist theory that men are the face of all that is evil in society.
November 7th, 2008 at 10:37 am
Davina,
"Just a few months ago, I started to gradually introduce men's issues to the ladies in my book club and though many of them still hold certain conventional, though debunked, beliefs about men and women, they're certainly not afraid to question their beliefs about he other side of the coin."
I think that is great... I guess I failed to mention the other group besides "high status" men that women in general will pay attention to and that is other women.
I stand by my assertion that in general the men who need help are in a terrible catch-22 situation.
They need help, but if they go trying to ask for it, it is instantly assumed that they aren't worthy of help.
The only people really capable of getting the attention of society at large are women who are already sympathetic to the situation men currently deal with, and men who advocate for male victims but do not appear to be victims of anything themselves... in fact the less of a victim they personally are the better.
This is why it is bothersome when it is suggested that any victimized guy just needs to appeal to emotion like women do when they are in trouble.
Appeals for help that deal with emotion are simply treated differently by society.
Think of it this way... if people saw a woman slumped over in tears in the middle of the sidewalk they would rush to her aid and try to find out what was the matter and see if they could help.
By contrast if people saw a guy crumpled in a ball on the sidewaly bawling his eyes out, what do you think would happen?... would people rush to his aid or would they laugh at him?
All that being said, it's not like people are completely indifferent to the pain of men... for example if people heard a gun shot, saw a guy double over holding his stomach and screaming for help... they would call the police and report the shooting and some might even rush to the mans side.
Basically men are allowed to be hurt when the threshhold of suffering is "legitimized" as being life or death... if it is just emotional pain due to social injustice few people are going to really care.
November 7th, 2008 at 11:35 am
Jason summed it up succiently but I have something to say regarding the appeal to emotion so women can show their samatarian side for men.
I find the suggestion to appeal to emotion interesting because there's one hard fact people are forgetting:
If a woman appeals to emotion when speaking up about injustice, she's praised for being brave.
If a man appeals to emotion when speaking up about injustice, he's told not to whine so much.
There's no denying that people are guilty of perpetuating the latter, especially women. It's like wanting it both ways. Women will want to hear what men think, but turn around and tell them they should stop because they have it going in society.
Can you blame men for countering with cold, hard facts? Emotion seems to have its limits when men are using them yet women are supplied with every level of support in the book when applying the same tactics.
Davina, the women in your book club are a rare breed. Meanwhile, there are still women out there who claim that men should speak up about their problems but only to certain point, lest they be labeled whiners.
November 7th, 2008 at 1:09 pm
"if people saw a guy crumpled in a ball on the sidewaly bawling his eyes out, what do you think would happen?"
They would call the cops and report the miscreant causing disturbance. Some will report him as a drug addict, others will see him as a beggar. What is very very interesting is - watch young kids when such a incident happens. They are drawn to it - their kind hearts feel compassion for whoever it is that seems to suffer, but their mothers will promptly correct them with a "Don't go there, come on we have to go!". Weren't these adults - kids at some point of time with the same kindness of heart and human compassion? Where did it go?
November 7th, 2008 at 1:21 pm
Pankaj, how far do you think you'd get explaining in only English a complicated debate about any topic under the sun to a person who only spoke Japanese?
If you wanted the person speaking Japanese to get the gist of your story you would have to find a way to speak to them in a manner they could understand whether by learning to speak Japanese, using sign language perhaps, or using Crayola's and paper.
To insist that they should just know what you mean might make you feel righteous but it doesn't get you understood.
Women already have all the laws and public sentiment on their side so they have no incentive to change the way they listen to what men are saying. So if men want to be understood, the onus to do so falls on them to make it happen (unfortunately just as it does in most things involving men and women).
It is often said here that feminists lie about statistics. Surely some of them do and surely their Glorious Leaders do so deliberately. But I believe the bulk of women don't lie about statistics so much as they just don't understand them and that is why they use statistics so irresponsibly and incorrectly.
They don't understand how statistics are arrived at or how statistics are properly applied in any given situation. So basically many of you guys are earnestly and faithfully speaking in English to women who only speak Japanese.
I get that you guys don't like the message I'm relaying here and I understand why you don't like it, but your feelings on this do not change the way things are.
November 7th, 2008 at 1:22 pm
Thank you Glenn.
Joep Zander ( Netherlands)
November 7th, 2008 at 2:21 pm
"To insist that they should just know what you mean might make you feel righteous but it doesn't get you understood."
You are tempting me to put up the ABC's 20-20 article on how boys communicate. It will be a violation of copyright and all that - so I have been avoiding it, unfortunately it is nowhere on youtube, but it was there a long time ago.
First, I am not insisting that they should "JUST KNOW" what you mean. What I am insisting is that women if they really want to listen to men MUST first make up their mind to value men's perspectives. Quite often women encourage men to talk and when they do - things get really uncomfortable for the woman - and the discussion ends or turns sour.
Do this to a man again and again - and he will get the point - which is women want men to talk - but say nothing that makes them uncomfortable. He also understands is talk your mind too often and he gets denied access to the goodies of companionship, either temporary or permanent.
November 7th, 2008 at 9:54 pm
@perspicacious...
Successful evolutionary strategy. Women look and behave like children because it plays into the natural protective instinct men have for those they perceive to be "weaker".
It is this same instinct that feminism uses to advantage. It's actually quite despicable that something that can only be described as admirable has been used in this way.
November 7th, 2008 at 10:12 pm
@perspicacious...
"Most children can't relate well to stats and facts and references. "
Actually many boys relate extremely well to these things(I was studying election analyses when I was nine), sometimes to the point of obsession. It's one of the reasons the the gender imbalance of the teaching service hurts boys so much. Too many women have absolutely no capacity to empathise with this quality in boys.
November 7th, 2008 at 10:41 pm
Gwallan,
Great point... about boys relating to stats, facts, and figures.
There was an entire generation of boys who collected baseball cards and pretty much memorized the stats on the back and ended up having all sorts of dicussions with their friends about those stats.
I'm not convinced that boys somehow only develop an attraction to statistical and fact based reasoning sometime after puberty.
November 7th, 2008 at 11:11 pm
*quitely notes* that perspicacious declined to comment on my post- reinforcing my conviction that women may sit there and SAY they want to hear you speak of your feelings... when the truth is for the most part the feelings they want to hear are your feelings reiforcing (thereby validating) their feelings.
And typically have little interest in your feelings unless your feelings coincide thereby reinforcing (thereby validating) their feelings.
GR
November 8th, 2008 at 12:17 am
@Gunner Retired...
Trust me when I say your feelings WILL be stored away for future use against you when and if necessary.
In my five decades I have never known a woman who did not do this eventually.
November 8th, 2008 at 1:03 am
Gwallen
Therein lies the fatal flaw when expressing your feelings to a woman.
God help you if the woman feels scorned cause she will use them against you. And pray there weren't any intimate feelings mixed in there either for she won't hesitate to employ it as a weapon to beat you down through character assasination.
"Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned."
November 8th, 2008 at 2:53 pm
# Gunner Retired Says:
November 7th, 2008 at 11:11 pm
*quitely notes* that perspicacious declined to comment on my post- reinforcing my conviction that women may sit there and SAY they want to hear you speak of your feelings... when the truth is for the most part the feelings they want to hear are your feelings reiforcing (thereby validating) their feelings.
And typically have little interest in your feelings unless your feelings coincide thereby reinforcing (thereby validating) their feelings.
GR
____________________
You can quietly note whatever you like but your sarcasm is also noted. I had 158 new Glenn Sacks messages in my mail box this morning. When I logged off last night I 'd cleared my box.
I cannot read, much less answer every post on these blogs and continue to clean my home, make dinner for my husband and talk with him every evening, personally communicate with my mother and my daughter, take care of my pets, work my part-time, job, etc.
So if I miss some posts so be it. It doesn't mean I *can't* or *don't want to* answer the question. That should be evident to anyone else who has a real life and I shouldn't have to be defending myself on this issue in the first place. I object to the finger of shame you tried to direct at me.
As for your content...I've already said what I thought. If you disagree with me, so be it. I also do not have to keep defending what I believe just because you come up with some sort of "gotcha" argument. You can have your "gotcha" moment and do a couple of happy dances but I don't have to keep beating a dead horse.
I said what I thought and why I thought it several times over and at this point I'm done. If you don't like that or disagree, so be it. But I don't *have* to keep defending my position even long after I've lost interest in the topic.
November 11th, 2008 at 10:42 am
By golly I think I've just told "pfffffffffffft, so there".
GR
July 21st, 2009 at 6:46 pm
Clinical & Research News
Men Shouldn't Be Overlooked as Victims of Partner Violence
By Joan Arehart-Treichel
Psychiatric News August 3, 2007
Volume 42, Number 15, page 31
© 2007 American Psychiatric Association
http://pn.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/full/42/15/31-a
DISABUSING THE DEFINITION OF DOMESTIC ABUSE: HOW WOMEN BATTER MEN AND THE ROLE OF THE FEMINIST STATE Florida State University Law Review: domestic violence is equally the province of women by LINDA KELLY:
Florida State University Law Review
http://www.law.fsu.edu/journals/lawreview/downloads/304/kelly.pdf
Women Commit Most Child Murders:
http://www.canadiancrc.com/Newspaper_Articles/David_McCrae_Women_Forgotten_Murderers_01FEB04.aspx
Women Commit Over 58% Of Child Abuse: United States Department of Human Health and Services: http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/pubs/cm06/chapter5.htm
Intimate partner murder:
Total victims 51571
Male victim of female 20,311 murdered
Female victim of male 31,260 murdered
Violence by Intimates: Analysis of Data on Crimes by Current or Former Spouses, Boyfriends, and Girlfriends, U.S. Department of Justice, March 1998
1.3 million women and 835,000
men are physically assaulted by an intimate
partner annually in the United States.
39.0 percent of female physical
assault victims, and 24.8 percent
of male physical assault victims, reported
being injured during their most recent
physical assault.
REFERENCES EXAMINING ASSAULTS BY WOMEN ON THEIR SPOUSES OR MALE PARTNERS:
This bibliography examines 249 scholarly investigations: 194 empirical studies and 55 reviews and/or analyses, which demonstrate that women are as physically aggressive, or more aggressive, than men in their relationships with their spouses or male partners. The aggregate sample size in the reviewed studies exceeds 241,700.
LINK: http://www.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm