Fellas! Better hold on to yourselves, because I’ve got some terrible news for you.
Actually, you’d better NOT hold on to yourselves. Because this is the news, straight from that always 100% reliable news source, the Men’s Rights subreddit:
I wonder if manginal orgasms are still allowed?
If anyone needs an antidote to that AVfM piece on India, click here.
On the connections between lead and crime, I think it’s really interesting/promising. I’m plunking some links to the studies I’ve found on this, so that Argenti and others can dig into the methodology:
1. Nevin (2000) Note: PDF.
2. Nevin (2007) Note: PDF.
3. Mielke & Zahran (2012) Via ScienceDirect, may be paywalled.
I can’t remember the number of links that gets you modded, so I’m going to plunk another link in my next comment.
OT and trigger warning: Jazabel covering story of a woman stabbed by a street harasser
http://jezebel.com/5974261/sf-street-harassment-stabbing-is-a-great-reminder-that-catcalling-isnt-a-joke
Here’s the Mother Jones article on the subject. I think pecunium or someone might have dropped this earlier, but just in case people missed it…
It looks like that numbers are very correlated, worldwide, and no exceptions have been found yet. Plus, it makes sense logically; it’s generally accepted that lead poisoning damages the brain in ways that relate to cognition, impulse control, etc. And when people have mapped areas with higher violent crime rates and areas with higher lead contamination rates, they match to a very high degree.
Pear_tree – that’s a big assumption with the trolls here.
I do like Abony for Abnoy. Is there such a thing as a Freudian typo?
I can’t make myself read that article about the Indian rape. Bad enough that scumbag in India saying the victim should have sweetly appealed to her rapists’ better natures, but MRAs essentially complaining that teh menz are treated SO BADLY there in the wake of this crime and so many others just like it, is vomit material. Hell, the point of the attention with this one is highlighting how common this extreme violence against women and girls is. Would these creatures think “men are treated as beasts” if they had lost someone* they cared for this way? Would they think it unfair of the father of another victim to complain? This other victim was tied up and raped and she died too. She was TWO YEARS OLD. And a woman was gang raped and beaten to death just days after the Delhi murder. Yeah, it’s soooo unjust to complain about anything going on in India.
*Unlikely, I know. MRAs seem to have little capacity to love anything save their boners and their imaginary** grievances.
**Real grievances and actually doing anything about them don’t appeal nearly as much to this lot.
David, keep an eye out for what the MRM has to say about this story I read today:
http://thinkprogress.org/health/2013/01/09/1420251/gonorrhea-cases-resistant/
Antibiotic resistant gonorrhea has arrived in North America.
@Ithiliana
Yeesh! That headline is enough to send shivers down my spine.
In other crazy MRA news, someone on Kotaku is trying to convince me that The Violence against women act gave women the ability to legally murder their husbands and that Feminists support the legislation because they’re for the murder of innocent men.
Oh, Kotaku, you never cease to amaze me.
@cloudiah:
1. I love reading Avicenna. Thank you for spreading the word about that article.
2. Re: lead poisoning/violence, thanks for all the links. That is a pretty amazing correlation. I guess the reason we don’t hear about it much is that people tend to think of lead as an old issue
@atomicgrizzly
Holy shit! It isn’t the Violence of Women Acts for crying out loud. How would anyone think that our mostly male, mostly married legislature would ever pass that? (Or is that the reason it failed this time?)
(I don’t know why I keep trying to find logical consistency in this lot, but I can’t help it.)
VAWA giving women a license to murder their husbands is a common theme among MRAs, since supposedly “battered woman defense” is a get-out-of-jail-free card even for women who weren’t battered I guess. The 1994 VAWA required a study of the role of expert testimony on battered women syndrome; the 1997 study recommended using the non-gendered terminology “battering and its effects.” The defense has been used successfully by men as well as women.
Confession: This is all cribbed from the mighty Wiki, but I followed all of the links and it’s pretty well researched.
lumi, I hadn’t known about Avicenna until I followed a link from Pharyngula, and now I’m subscribed to another blog! Soon I won’t have time to work since I’ll just need to read blogs all day long. Sigh.
@cloudiah
I’ve heard (and I wish I could remember where) that it isn’t that successful a defense anyway. If true, that makes all of their whining about legally killing men even stupider.
It’s not like the ‘battered women’s defense” even gets women who were battered out of serving serious time. It might have been here I first found this: http://www.umich.edu/~clemency/women_summaries.html (although many of those cases are from the enlightened olden days, like 1990’s /sarcasm)
Heh, I started reading Pharyngula a couple years ago, and now have most of FTB in my feeds! Good thing I’m a student and don’t have to be productive most of the time 🙂
I meant, unenlightened, of course (hey, just happy I linked correctly!)
I believe raising battery has been more useful in mitigating sentences, rather than getting people off completely. But feminists definitely have supported it, therefore EVIL EVIL MUST BE STOPPED. Otherwise, we’d have to have a thoughtful, reasoned discussion about IPV and clearly that would be a terrible thing to have happen.
“Holy shit! It isn’t the Violence of Women Acts for crying out loud. How would anyone think that our mostly male, mostly married legislature would ever pass that? (Or is that the reason it failed this time?)”
He was trying to disprove the idea of a patriarchy:
Here’s the full conversation:
Him:
“”oh please. anytime a woman writes an opinion piece it’s “not journalism” but when a man does it it’s “truth”.”
Really? You really think that? Let me guess, you believe in the patriarchy.”
Me:
“I do! Picture: GOP house committee heads before they added one woman.
http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/18aghesw649agjpg/original.jpg”
Him:
“And yet men pass laws like VAWA that are not only a benefit to women, but also criminalize men.
Believing in Patriarchy is like believing in God. There simply is no prove for that and just like believing in God, it can become really dangerous.”
Me:
“The Violence against women act? You mean the bill that criminalizes men who beat women? Yeah, let me break out the violin for them…
BTW, the GOP, responsible for that diverse group of people up there, is also against VAWA. Seems there’s something of a connection. I just can’t put my finger on it.”
Him:
You couldn’t be more wrong.
The VAWA is based on the Duluth Power and Control Wheel model, which falsely presumes that all domestic violence is perpetrated by men.
Example: A man is being beaten by his woman (probably with an object as violent women tend to do that), he calls the police, the police arrives, the police arrests him.
What happened? VAWA happened. With this Police is forced to arrest the man immediately and ask questions later. Maybe he will get free, but who protects this man from his woman?
Nobody, which is why those women are free to shoot their husbands and say that he beat them. Yes, VAWA helps there too. Thank god it’s gone for now.
You know with laws like this in place – which always seem to exclude men – one has to wonder if we are not actually living in a Matriarchy.
But i’m being cynical now. I’m giving you the benefit of a doubt, you seem to be different, unlike most feminists, you listen to what is have to say, even though i am a white male! The biggest crime of my life, apparently.
Just a warning though: If you run around and tell the world that you’re a feminist, you should at least know what feminists actually do. What Organisations like NOW do. How they actively push for laws like VAWA, ro others that give women and ONLY women benefits, while at the same time yell about women empowerment.
If you really think that women should’ve the right to kill their men whenever they like, please continue to call yourself a feminist, if you don’t, call yourself a humanist. Otherwise you’d have to stand up to the misdoing of others.
Me:
Being a white male isn’t a crime, but ignoring white male privilege makes you wrong.
You’re misrepresenting the law completely. It did not make it impossible for women to be charged with domestic violence, nor did it legalize murder.
It actually saved the lives of countless women by helping them regain control. Not all domestic violence is committed by men, but 80% of it is, enough for law enforcement to take claims of male on female violence seriously, but not enough to arrest men without cause (no, this wasn’t legalized by VAWA either).
“How they actively push for laws like VAWA, ro others that give women and ONLY women benefits”
As opposed to the benefits white men already get, like higher pay, less fear of rape and an almost non-existent history of systematic oppression. Also, people don’t feel like they have the right to your body. You cry about laws like VAWA and affirmative action, but ignore the factors that made them necessary in the first place.
“If you really think that women should’ve the right to kill their men whenever they like, please continue to call yourself a feminist”
That’s a nice strawman you have there.
“It’s not like the ‘battered women’s defense” even gets women who were battered out of serving serious time. It might have been here I first found this: http://www.umich.edu/~clemency/women_summaries.html (although many of those cases are from the enlightened olden days, like 1990′s /sarcasm)”
Those women MUST be stone-cold killers! They’re not even hot!
And then there is the fact that VAWA has saved men’s lives, because battered women can escape abusers through other means than murder. Apparently, not killing men is also misandry.
Wow, atomicgrizzly, you’ve found yourself a current r/mensrights reader. He hits all the talking points.
Also misandry: the fact lumi probably just made some lurking MRA’s head explode.
I love it when they get all condescending about feminism, like despite all the pushback from the culture and all the “I’m not a feminist, but…,” you just mindlessly decided to apply the label to yourself while knowing nothing about it.
grizzly, is this person YOUR facebook friend? I’m hoping that he’s a FoaF.
“I love it when they get all condescending about feminism, like despite all the pushback from the culture and all the “I’m not a feminist, but…,” you just mindlessly decided to apply the label to yourself while knowing nothing about it.”
Funny thing about that line. I went to the NOW website to see what horrors awaited, only to find articles on *gasp!* marriage equality and pro-choice legislation!
@inurashii
It’s just some guy from the comments section of Kotaku.
oh Kotaku. Right. Reading up in the thread.
Yeah that site is a fucking cesspit.
Isn’t the logic that all relationships involve people hitting each other, so any woman could claim domestic violence at any time?
It’s a shame that the Kotaku commenters are so shit, because the articles are often really good. IO9 is probably the Gawkerverse site I get most disappointed by when I scroll down, though. Great writers, but then stuff like “10 awesome female engineers in scifi” gets filled up with notes from guys’ boners.
atomicgrizzly: it’s like you had a run in with a more coherent NWO.