[TW for the comments to this post; discussions of rape and abuse.]
The Southern Poverty Law Center, an organization devoted to tracking and exposing hate groups, has just published a detailed report on the misogyny and violent rhetoric so pervasive in the Men’s Rights Movement — as well as the actual violence inspired by this sort of hatred of women. It’s a piece you all should read, even though few of the details will be new to long-time readers of this blog.
Arthur Goldwag, an expert on conspiracy-mongers and the far right, argues (I think correctly) that the Men’s Rights movement is largely a backlash against the many successes of feminism over the last several decades:
It’s not much of a surprise that significant numbers of men in Western societies feel threatened by dramatic changes in their roles and that of the family in recent decades. Similar backlashes, after all, came in response to the civil rights movement, the gay rights movement, and other major societal revolutions. What is something of a shock is the verbal and physical violence of that reaction.
[Thomas] Ball’s suicide brought attention to an underworld of misogynists, woman-haters whose fury goes well beyond criticism of the family court system, domestic violence laws, and false rape accusations.
The Men’s Rights Movement, as it exists today, is not a civil rights movement; it is a regressive, hateful reaction against a civil rights movement — that is, feminism.
Those who truly care about the rights of men, and who are not motivated by a hatred of women or feminism, need to repudiate the hate and the violent rhetoric of the Men’s Rights Movement as it exists today. Only then can there be a Men’s Rights Movement worthy of the name.
EDITED TO ADD: The SPLC has also put up a guide to some of the more hateful sites in the manosphere. Longtime readers will be familiar with most of them.
EDITED TO ADD AGAIN: And a piece debunking some Men’s Rights Myths.
EDITED TO ADD AGAIN, AGAIN: The discussion of the SPLC report on the Men’s Rights Subreddit is surprisingly reasonable, so far. (I mean, compared to what I expected. Meanwhile, over in this thread, the Men’s Rightsers are behaving as they usually do.)
My 9:19pm comment which starts being adressed to adressed to Holly has the sentence:
“I that wasn’t pretty clear from before.”
That contains a typo, it should be:
“If that wasn’t pretty clear from before;”
The first one doesn’t make sense, but can be misconstrued so I thought I’d correct it.
My apologies Tamen, for asking in such an insensitive way, on a thread that hasn’t exactly been welcoming. I apologize for any harm or distress I may have brought you.
I read the feministe article on cunnigulus and sex during menstration. And I was disgusted with it for the very reasons you mentioned. I don’t often read their stuff over there, but that one I did. And it doesn’t seem to have crossed many minds as to where that thinking leads. I can sympathize with women who’ve been expected to perform blowjobs for men, even when its not something they enjoy but the men won’t reciprocate in like and kind. Personally, if my partner were to insist on acts I don’t like to perform and tried pressuring me into it I’d walk. When I was younger I tried to please in this way, its not worth it. And I sure as hell don’t want to pressure my partners into doing things they don’t want to do.
I suppose you’re right that there are several lines of thought on what makes for consent. Still, you’re thinking on the concept of consent is similar to feminist thought, and balanced. I haven’t seen the movie you’re talking about, but on occassions where I watch movies, I have seen women “seduce” in ways that definately promote the idea that men do not need to consent. Battlestar Galactica comes to mind.
The NCVS report again? I’ve gone over these numbers and why mras are being dumbasses about them umpteenth fucking times. Get some new lines, I’m getting tired over here. Maybe I should just archive my response posts and copy paste.
Really? You agree with this sentiment as an accurate one and as an accurate reading of the Feministe posts?:
Because, while there were problematic assumptions in the article (plenty of men who won’t engage in sex during menstruation won’t for heavily misogynist reasons, there is a problem, however, in saying that to all of them), saying that it is a relationship deal breaker for you if your partner won’t have certain kinds of sex is not the equivalent of saying it would be okay to coerce an unwilling partner into those kinds of sex.
Here’s what the actual article said:
<blockquote:His reasoning was “it’s gross.” And when I stopped seeing him approximately 24 hours after that conversation, my reasoning was, “I don’t want to be with someone who thinks that a natural, healthy uterus-having body is gross.” Do you have a right to refuse to have period sex because you think bleeding vaginas be nasty? Of course. And do I have a right to leave your ass and think less of you because of that? You betcha. Because it does come down to misogyny, basically — most pre-menopausal people with uteruses and vaginas who are old enough to consent to sex bleed once a month.
The author of both pieces makes it explicitly clear that it’s not okay to pressure people into it, but it is okay as a dealbreaker.
Well Tamen, I have to admit I still suffer a bias towards thinking of rape as female victim, male perp…although I hope to put such thinking in the dust bin where it belongs.
Some feminists seem to look at rape through a historical lens. But with the stats that come out now about when men in our society are most likely to suffer rape (boys early in puberty from what I gather) and the age old thinking that a guy is always up for sex, well, I have to wonder if more men were raped than is thought. On the other hand, marital rape was outright promoted. One painting in particular comes to mind..”The rape of(I can’t remember her name” and was frequently given as a wedding gift to remind the bride about how one of the worst things in life could happen to her but if she worked hard she could make a happy life.
I think what is definitly needed is to stop rape, regardless of gender. Even one person raped is too many and there is no moral excuse for condoning or dismissing it on any grounds.
Holly: I tried not to talk about that article of TS. I originally was talking about Bostonian’s comment here. I did not intend to defend the post by TS here. Bostonian and other commenters asked me why I wasn’t commenting on TS’s post – I should’ve refrained from explaining why.
@pillowinhell Rape of Lucretia, or Rape of the Sabine Women, both popular themes for wedding chests in the Renaissance. “Heroic Rape”, oh yay.
http://www.oneonta.edu/faculty/farberas/arth/arth200/Body/Heroic_Rape.html
DSC, its my stupid ass that wonders why the numbers for envelopment was placed seperatly, and if you’re tired of flogging that horse its fine, you don’t need to explain further.
Also, yes I did have a problem with it, because I could imagine the worst case scenario conversation with a guy based on this. Refusing cunnigulus in and of itself does not a misogynist make. I think there should be other behaviours or signs along with that before you make that decision. Also, I do not masterbate when menstruating, does this mean that I’m a misogynist? Or maybe it just means that I don’t like the feeling of blood drying on my skin or the clean up afterwards? Does the fact that I don’t like giving blow jobs or getting facials mean that I don’t like men?
Certainly, people are free to find more suitable relationships to meet their needs. Its how its handled, because handled wrong it can become a pressure tactic.
“I’m sorry honey, this relationship is going great except you won’t go down on me, so maybe it would be better if we just broke up”. Now, if it was a committed relationship, and the guy is in love, do you think there would be no pressure to perform? If its stated up front at the begining of the relationship that that’s something you’re looking for and would consider a dealbreaker its different. It has to be handled with care.
So yes, I understood what the article was about, but I can also see how that article can be misconstrued, especially by people like me who still have that nasty little bias kicking around that says men can’t be rape victims.
For the record, I’ve had a few different tactivcs used to persuad me to give blowjobs. One of them being that if I didn’t, I musnt like men, with a side of “are you sure you aren’t lesbian?”
At the risk of being flamed out of this discussion, why is there so much discussion about what a suspected troll said?
I agree with the poster who said that the Register Her site is creepy, stalkerish, and bizarre.
I think (hope) that this was just a warning shot and that SPLC will continue to expose what the MRA’s do. If you don’t know what they have been able to do to victims in the family courts, then the SPLC action won’t make as much sense to you.
There is a new study about to be released from the DOJ and the University of Michigan that confirms the growing body of research on how it is that abusers often have the upper hand in family courts. MRA’s have had a big part to play in that. Abusers don’t care about the children caught up in all this, and the MRA’s certainly don’t.
What needs to happen is that the true father’s rights moderates, who aren’t misogynists and seriously want to see a better system in place need to break away from the MRA’s and join with protective mothers to fight for court reform. More educated and accountable judges, and court personnel are going to make better decisions…they are going to take the time to separate the small number of false allegations from real cases of abuse. Then everyone wins.
Thanks Felix! The name totally escaped me.
Only click that link if you’re ready to see rape glorified and glamourized. I can’t believe I was raised with this stuff as being normal…my grandfather used an image of a Sabine woman being abducted by a Roman as a bedside water glass coaster. My mother painted it.
Yes and its been kicking around for a long time. People love that painting without knowing that its a morality tale to accept rape. I think there are stylized versions of it, so it could be carved or embroidered by the average person, and to look at them you wouldn’t realize that its representitive of that tale.
Oh wait.. I’m thinking of Zeus’. Obsession with Leda, who became a swan.
Plenty of fairy tales centered on that theme too. Cinderella’s slipper comes to mind.
Darksidecat: I don’t think anyone here has talked about the NCVS report, but rather the NISVS 2010 Report.
As for what I find problematic about the Feministe posts I can say that you touch upon it when you say that all men are not misogynists for not wanting cunnilingus or period sex. There is always a chance of the dumping turning into a negotiation (initiated by any of the parts), especially if any of the parts have invested emotionally in the relationship, and then a (perhaps even misplaced) value judgement of misogyni might then make the following negotiation more coercive as being in the form of an ultimatum or a perception of such. Judging and expressing that judgement of people on their sexual preferences or dislikes is not the same as breaking up with an incompatibel partner.
Pillowinhell: Both male and female victims have in common that the most common perpetrator is an intimate partner so marital rape is not exclusively “wife rape” as some call marital rape.
Yeah the rape of the swan. Didn’t Sleeping Beauty have several children in some versions of the tale, before waking up? Sometimes I think the fairytales embed rape fantasies in our psyches…
I was taught that if a woman in a painting like that has her hands thrown up in the air, that was a visual hint that she gets raped. Yay art. :p
And boys are taught that they should kiss any lady they find — even dead ones.
Boys. Don’t do that. It is super unsanitary. And even if she’s not actually dead that doesn’t make it better.
Tamen, tru enough that marital rape can happen to any gender. But how many stories, paintings or poems were aimed explicitly towards men to accept being raped by their lover or partner? The only one coming to mind at the moment is the story of Hermaphroditus? I think? Anyways the greek tale of a young boy who was changed into a mix of male and female when he refused a nymphs advances.
And that castle with the thorns around it. Defenses are totally for storming, with a really big sword.
Lots of young boys get seduced in those stories/paintings. Ganymede, for one. Also abducted by Zeus, to be a cup bearer, among other roles. (Latin form of name is Catamitus…hence catamite.)
This message was brought to you by Sunday evening with Google.
So Tamen: Why are you so up in arms about what you think to be unfair treatment of TS, while not being, in any visible way, up in arms about his similar (IMO, worse) treatment of LBT and Holly?
Felix I may have to read those old stories again, starting with Ovids metamorphises again.
“At the risk of being flamed out of this discussion, why is there so much discussion about what a suspected troll said?”
Because one site’s troll is another site’s favoured writer/commenter. And this blog is about what those people say.
pillowinhell: Yes, those stories you list and more do exist. Yes, I think they have been and have the potential to be harmful to anyone in a relationship with someone who takes any stock in them. I am hoping less and less people let their ethics and moral be influenced by stories like those. Both men and women report a high level of sex with their intimate partner which they did not consent freely to. A rate I hope can be reduced for both men aand women.
Pecunium: Are yours or anyone else’s conclusion about Bostonian’s comment contigent upon what I write about TS rather than upon the content of Bostonian’s comment itself? Please say so straight up if that’s the case.
Pillowhell: “I haven’t read the discussion on their findings, so I’m not sure why they presented envelopment seperately.”
The discussion section in their report has this to say about their statistics on rape by envelopment:
“As an example of prevalence differences between the National Intimate Partner and Sexual
Violence Survey and other surveys, the lifetime prevalence estimate of rape for men in this report is lower than what has been reported in other surveys (e.g., for forced sex more broadly) (Basile, Chen, Black, & Saltzman, 2007). This could be due in part to the National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey making a distinction between
rape and being made to penetrate someone else. Being made to penetrate is a form of sexual victimization distinct from rape that is particularly unique to males and, to our knowledge, has not been explicitly measured in previous national studies. It is possible that rape questions in prior studies captured the experience of being made to penetrate someone else, resulting in higher prevalence estimates for male rape in those studies.”
So basically they believe that previous surveys have overstated the number of male rape victims by counting rape through envelopment as rape. I suspect that, given the prestige of the CDC, there will be pressure on future surveys to take this into account when defining rape. It also seems fairly likely that, were it not for the need to deal with these other surveys that did count envelopment as rape, the CDC wouldn’t have bothered trying to count it at all just like their previous surveys.
I apparently missed Roberta’s fantasy about me. (Though someone earlier above said my attacker was female. No, sorry, he was a guy.) Dare I ask what it involved?
Also, who the hell is toysoldier? I swear, I leave a thread for a couple days, and suddenly it goes kaboom all over again! I have no idea who that guy is, but I still feel extremely uncomfortable with the idea that he’s lying about his own abuse.