GirlWritesWhat on “The Necessity of Domestic Violence”: “I don’t really find too much [that's] seriously ethically questionable.”

Yesterday, we took a look at Ferdinand Bardamu’s manosphere manifesto “The Necessity of Domestic Violence,” a thoroughly despicable piece of writing that concludes:

Women should be terrorized by their men; it’s the only thing that makes them behave better than chimps.

I decided to take a look at Bardamu’s post yesterday after running across a discussion of it in Reddit’s new FeMRA subreddit, a forum ostensibly devoted to what “women can do to advance men’s rights as women.” It’s a strange little subreddit, started by a man and dominated by some of Reddit’s most unsavory MaleMRAs, some of them banned in the regular Men’s Rights subreddit.

Recently one of the most unsavory of the bunch, calling himself JeremiahGuy this time, posted a link to Bardamu’s domestic violence manifesto, which he hosts on his website. Jeremiah naturally used the discussion as an excuse to post more apologias for domestic “discipline” along the lines of the quote from him I featured yesterday.

But I was a little surprised to see GirlWritesWhat, the blabby FeMRA video blogger who’s captured the hearts of Reddit’s Men’s Rights crowd, step into the conversation with something of a defense of Bardamu’s noxious views. After reading Bardamu’s manifesto – the one advocating that men “terrorize” their women to make them behave – GWW blithely concluded:

I don’t really find too much in the article that strikes me as seriously ethically questionable.

Have I taken that remark out of context? Yes. In context, it’s worse. Here’s the entire quote from her, and a further clarification of her position.

She wasn’t the only one in the discussion to get upvotes for suggesting that men slapping women around from time to time isn’t really such a big deal. MaunaLoona (a MaleMRA) wrote:

Lots of MRAs like to pretend that they care about male victims of domestic violence. But the Men’s Rights movement hasn’t done shit for them. And here, I think, is why: too many MRAs are less interested in helping male victims of domestic violence than they are in providing excuses and justifications for male abusers.

About these ads

Posted on August 16, 2012, in antifeminism, antifeminst women, domestic violence, FemRAs, men who should not ever be with women ever, misogyny, MRA, patriarchy, reactionary bullshit, reddit and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. 742 Comments.

  1. “Nagging” is abuse? Yeah, you’re credible.

  2. To abuse apologist: As someone who knows what emotional abuse is like, fuck off.

  3. Yup, nagging is abuse, because expecting a man to carry 50% of the house workload is misandry, asking him to contribute is worse, and asking him to do the thing you already asked and he didn’t do is the worst misandry of all!

  4. Dude, no. Nagging is not emotional abuse. You do not get to respond to actual emotional abuse with physical force. You definitely don’t get to respond to nagging with physical force.

    Throwing things is not comparable to nagging (really dude?). Throwing things is already physical.

    Self-defense stops the moment the threat passes, period.

  5. as a general rule I am opposed to people setting other people on fire

    What? Are you trying to tell me it’s *never* okay to light someone on fire? This isn’t a magic pony ride at Disneyland!

  6. Self-defense stops the moment the threat passes, period.

    Though it is acknowledged that women in abusive relationships, women with reason to fear for their lives, are more likely to choose another time if they’re going to kill their abuser; ie. pick a time when he’s drunk or asleep to kill him. It’s an ongoing threat, in those cases.

  7. Kitteh — yeah but it’s called battered spouse syndrome (or similar), not nagged spouse syndrome. And idk about there, but it’s only been the last couple of years here that juries took that defense seriously.

  8. @kittehserf, If the abuser is asleep, the wife can call the police. Her life is not threatened if the abuser is asleep. This idea of letting her off for killing suggests that domestic abuse by a male deserves the death penalty when domestic abuse by a female rarely gets punished at all. The wife killing the husband should not be treated less seriously than the husband killing the wife, but too often it is in the society, suggesting that if the husband gets killed “he must have done something to deserve it”. Murderers should not get off the hook just because they are women and those killed are men.

  9. Wow, another necro troll wanders in to show its arse.

    Go look up some actual information about abuse victims and how they’re terrorised, fuckwit.

  10. Figures. You can’t come up with a logical response so you just throw insults. I find people like you, who get defensive every time their sexism is pointed out, to be pretty sad. If the wife is not in immediate danger, then she should not be killing people. Why is that so hard for you to understand? You support these insane ideas that “if he hit her, he deserves to die” something no sane person would ever say if a man killed a woman. Stop pretending to preach against sexism if you can’t handle it when people call you out on your own.

  11. Did we just get two different necro trolls on three different months-to-years-old threads within two hours of each other? Wow.

  12. You’re deliberately ignoring the difference between being hit and being abused and terrorized for years. Coincidently, that’s just what MRAs do when they lump all kinds of domestic abuse as the same so they can make up stats that support their agenda.

  13. @ Katz: Is “necro troll” a term that is used on this site to describe anyone who disagrees with the opinion of the majority here? Because considering that you’ve done nothing but throw insults, it seems that the one trolling is you. When someone questions your beliefs, you throw a hissy fit rather than respond with anything logical.

    @Kim: While being terrorized for years is certainly worse than being hit once, it still doesn’t mean that murder is okay. There are other solutions. There are other ways of getting help. Too often if a man is murdered by his wife and the wife says she was abused, people assume it is true even if there is no evidence. Many times the man killed was an abuser, but not always. Saying “well if a woman killed a man then he must have done something to deserve it” is sexist. Another point is that often you hear the term “emotionally abusive” in reference to bad ex-husbands yet you almost never hear the same term used for bad ex-wives. It seems that our society only views angry words as abusive if they come out of a man’s mouth. A man is seen as weak if he calls his wife’s words “abusive”. Even if he is hit, he is still seen as weak if he complains. It is common in the comics to see husbands hit by their wives with frying pans and this is treated as a joke. The point I am trying to make here is that people should be treated equally regardless of gender and that doesn’t always seem to be the case.

  14. Is “necro troll” a term that is used on this site to describe anyone who disagrees with the opinion of the majority here?

    Nope!

    That was easy.

  15. @Katz can you explain what it means then so I can tell if you are guilty of it?

  16. Too often if a man is murdered by his wife and the wife says she was abused, people assume it is true even if there is no evidence.

    Do you have any evidence that it helps in court? Because the reason police precincts and laws specific to deal with male-on-female domestic abuse were created was that the regular police and courts kept letting men get away with abuse over and over.

    It is common in the comics to see husbands hit by their wives with frying pans and this is treated as a joke.

    Female violence is treated as a joke because it’s not seen as really threatening, and because toxic masculinity heaps scorn on men that are weaker than women. When shit gets real, it’s the man that is expected to control the “bitch” with physical violence.

  17. It’s not wise to jump into a conversation and start pronouncing judgments if you don’t actually understand the words being said.

    And it certainly isn’t a compelling case for why others should accept you as the sole arbiter of who is or isn’t guilty of what behaviors.

  18. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/11/men-women-prison-sentence-length-gender-gap_n_1874742.html?utm_hp_ref=crime

    I do have evidence that men get longer prison sentences than women who commit similar crimes. I consider this perhaps the most serious gender issue that men face today in America (I hate it when the first thing that comes to mind when people talk about men’s gender issues is circumcision. There are much more serious issues. Yes I realize that men’s groups often focus too much on the circumcision issue)

    And when it comes to being the victims of domestic abuse, men are in a double bind, because if a woman is striking them if they hit back they are seen as abusers but if they don’t hit back people laugh at them because they “got beat up by a girl”. Usually men decide that being mocked is better than being hated, so they don’t fight back. Yes women are more likely to be seriously injured by domestic violence than men are and should be the main focus of anti-domestic violence programs (I have to give these disclaimers because people automatically assume that if I speak on male gender issues that I don’t care about female gender issues. It is possible to care about both at the same time), however I feel that people should be judged (negatively) by how hard they hit, not by what gender they are.

  19. I do have evidence that men get longer prison sentences than women who commit similar crimes.

    The race divide is wayyyy steeper than the gender divide on that one. A black woman gets harsher punishment than a white man.

  20. Don’t know what a Necro troll is? Hint: This post is from August 16, 2012 and you responded to comment October 27, 2013.

    You don’t seem to know much about “Battered Woman/Spousal Syndrome”, including the fact that it is not in itself a legal defense. Here’s a link to a helpful article about the topic.

    Dutton, M. A. (2009, August). Update of the “”Battered Woman Syndrome”” Critique. Harrisburg, PA: VAWnet, a project of the National Resource Center on Domestic Violence/Pennsylvania Coalition Against Domestic Violence.

    http://www.vawnet.org/applied-research-papers/print-document.php?doc_id=2061

  21. @Katz it wasn’t being said on the page I read until you and kittehserf used it against me (I’m sorry I don’t have time to read all 700 comments on this thread and who knows how many other threads until I chance upon the meaning). I don’t expect to be the sole arbiter of who is guilty, but I deserve as much chance as you do at deciding. It just seems like you use it against people you disagree with rather than people actually guilty of it. Yes there is a lot of bad behavior in the MRA community, but the attitude that seems to be common in the threads on this site that any talk of male gender issues is wrong seems sexist to me. The genders should be treated equally which means that we should look out for the concerns of both genders. Just because women have more issues facing them doesn’t mean they are the only ones.

  22. @vaiyt: The fact that blacks may have it worse than men when it comes to the court system does not excuse the double standard when it comes to gender. The difference in sentencing by gender isn’t small: Men getting 63% more time for the same type of crimes, much less likely to avoid sentencing, and are twice as likely to get jail time.

    @Brooked: Okay, got it. I followed a link in. I didn’t just randomly search the website. There shouldn’t be anything wrong with commenting on an old page, especially since so many people have gotten back into the discussion. Secondly Katz and kittehserf were using “troll” to mean “person they disagree with” which isn’t helpful in the discussion.

    Thank you for the link. I do agree that battered spouses should have a lower punishment if they kill their spouse, but I still don’t think murder is justified unless their life was immediately at risk. I think it is wrong to say “well he was an abusive husband so he deserved to die” because I doubt anyone would say that for an abusive wife.

  23. cassandrakitty

    I’m not convinced that people pointing going “ugh, thread necromancy, piss off” counts as people “getting back into the conversation”.

  24. Hibernia:
    Yes, double standards in juidical punishments are a problem. Yes, the erasure of male victims of domestic violence is a problem. Yes, social expectations for men to just “toughen up” are a problem.

    But while those arguments are true, I’m not quite seeing what *point* you’re arguing here. You necro’ed this thread with a “murder is not a solution!” point, and then randomly added those arguments which have nothing at all to do with that point.

    So, given those problems, which do exist, what is your point here? What are you actually arguing?

  25. Of course women can be emotionally abusive toward their partners. Why on earth do you think this is a big secret that only you know?

    The difference is that when people try to leave their abusive partners, women leaving men are much more likely than men leaving women to be killed by the partner they are trying to leave.

    When there is an inherent bias in a system, you don’t get equality by treating everyone the same.

  26. Wait, wait, who on here was advocating MURDER as an appropriate response to abuse? What the hell is Hibernia86 even responding to?

  27. For the record, I do agree that killing someone should always be the absolute last resort. I hear people commenting on the court case about Daniel Morcombe’s killer saying how he should be killed for it or they hope he dies in prison, and it disgusts me.

    The problem I have with your argument, is your complete disregard for facts and your blithe assertions that equality means treating everyone the same.

  28. @vaiyt: The fact that blacks may have it worse than men

    Thank you for revealing that the group “men” in your mind doesn’t include any black people.

  29. You support these insane ideas …

    Well, it’s only right that Necro-troll should go for as many bigotries as possible.

  30. I do have evidence that men get longer prison sentences than women who commit similar crimes. I consider this perhaps the most serious gender issue that men face today in America

    And your solution to “most serious gender issue” is longer prison sentences for women, I see.

  31. “And your solution to “most serious gender issue” is longer prison sentences for women, I see.”

    Or shorter sentences for men. Come on, juridical fairness is in fact something that should be aspired to.

  32. @Octo I wasn’t posting against judicial fairness, I was noting that Hibernia86′s solution appeared to be “punish women more” rather than “ease up on men”.

  33. I love it when necroers walk into an old comment thread and completely misunderstand the comment they’re responding to. It’s so clear that kitteh wasn’t advocating murder that I have a hard time believing that Hibernia isn’t deliberately misreading what she’s saying.

  34. Yes there is a lot of bad behavior in the MRA community, but the attitude that seems to be common in the threads on this site that any talk of male gender issues is wrong seems sexist to me.

    Ok, there’s no bad behavior in that community, the community is completely bad. Really, name one decent MRA.
    Also that’s complete bullshit. We talk about male victims of DV and rape quite often, without questioning it. We just don’t tolerate when certain claims are false, or erase female victims.

    @vaiyt: The fact that blacks may have it worse than men

    “blacks”
    … really?
    And there’s no black men apparently.

  35. Yes there is a lot of bad behavior in the MRA community, but the attitude that seems to be common in the threads on this site that any talk of male gender issues is wrong seems sexist to me. The genders should be treated equally which means that we should look out for the concerns of both genders. Just because women have more issues facing them doesn’t mean they are the only ones.

    You are a simple-minded jerkoff.

  36. Poor Hibernia86 – so convinced he’d performed a major gotcha and proved a commenter here sexist that his response to being called a necro-troll is:

    @Katz can you explain what it means then so I can tell if you are guilty of it?

    Ni/snigger

  37. Ok, where the fuck did that “Ni” come from? I did not write that! Sorry to everyone, that looks like I was using the n-word as an insult. I wasn’t and I never would.

  38. cassandrakitty

    Anti-intersectionality-bot does not understand these complicated ideas. Anti-intersectionality-bot also does not understand the concept that treating people who aren’t equals in the eyes of society “equally” isn’t actually particularly “fair”. Anti-intersectionality-bot thinks that you can make social inequality vanish by pretending it doesn’t exist, like a toddler playing hide and seek who thinks that if they cover their own eyes nobody can see them.

  39. As usual, I see our little necromancer doesn’t bother to understand the issues or discussion, throws around a bunch of half-facts and even more statements that assume facts not in evidence, and then accuses us all of hating men.

    We need better quality trolls!

  40. If there’s a gender gap in sentencing it’s because patriarchy treats women as the weaker, fairer sex. I don’t know why necrotroll thinks this is some sort of gotcha to be used against feminism. Critical thinking fail.

  41. Necrotroll still hasn’t proven zir first assertion, that women claim to be abused as a defense for murder, and that this defense works.

  42. I notice it’s now been several hours since the necrotroll pooped here. Meanwhile, here’s a little light reading on the battered woman defence, and how easily it doesn’t work:

    In R v Ahluwalia (1992) 4 AER 889 a battered wife killed her violent and abusive husband. She claimed provocation and the judge directed the jury to consider whether, if she did lose her self-control, a reasonable person having the characteristics of a well-educated married Asian woman living in England would have lost her self-control given her husband’s provocation. On appeal, it was argued that he should have directed the jury to consider a reasonable person suffering from ‘battered woman syndrome’. Having considered fresh medical evidence, the Court of Appeal ordered a retrial on the basis that the new evidence showed an arguable case of diminished responsibility in English law.[3]

    Similarly, in R v Thornton (No 2) (1996) 2 AER 1023 the battered wife adduced fresh evidence that she had a personality disorder and the Court of Appeal ordered a retrial considering that, if the evidence had been available at the original trial, the jury might have reached a different decision. The victim does not have to be in a position to carry out the threats immediately.[4]

    In R v Charlton (2003) EWCA Crim 415, following threats of sexual and violent abuse against herself and her daughter, the defendant killed her obsessive, jealous, controlling partner while he was restrained by handcuffs, blindfolded and gagged as part of their regular sexual activity. The term of five years’ imprisonment was reduced to three and a half years because of the terrifying threats made by a man determined to dominate and control the defendant’s life. The threats created a genuine fear for the safety of herself and more significantly, her daughter, and this caused the defendant to lose control and make the ferocious attack.[5]

    In HM’s AG for Jersey v Holley (2005) 3 AER 371 the Privy Council regarded Smith as wrongly decided, interpreting the Act as setting a purely objective standard. Thus, although the accused’s characteristics were to be taken into account when assessing the gravity of the provocation, the standard of self-control to be expected was invariable except for the accused’s age and sex. The defendant and the deceased both suffered from chronic alcoholism and had a violent and abusive relationship. The evidence was that the deceased was drunk and taunted him by telling him that she had had sex with another man. The defendant then struck the deceased with an axe which was an accident of availability. Psychiatric evidence was that his consumption of alcohol was involuntary and that he suffered from a number of other psychiatric conditions which, independently of the effects of the alcohol, might have caused the loss of self-control and induced him to kill. Lord Nicholls said:

    Whether the provocative acts or words and the defendant’s response met the ‘ordinary person’ standard prescribed by the statute is the question the jury must consider, not the altogether looser question of whether, having regard to all the circumstances, the jury consider the loss of self-control was sufficient excusable. The statute does not leave each jury free to set whatever standard they consider appropriate in the circumstances by which to judge whether the defendant’s conduct is ‘excusable’.[6]

    And that’s just under British law.

    I defy our troll to prove that the patterns of prior spousal abuse in these cases are the equivalent of a woman merely slapping a man, or beaning him with a frying-pan.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 6,657 other followers

%d bloggers like this: