The We Hunted the Mammoth Pledge Drive continues! If you haven’t already, please consider sending some bucks my way. (And don’t worry that the PayPal page says Man Boobz.) Thanks!
If you hope to make it through the day without losing all hope in humanity, you may not wish to read the following thoughts on Ray and Janay Rice from our old friend from The Spearhead, W.F. Price.
I know people instinctively and reflexively sympathize with the victim of a brutal attack, but …
Yeah, I’m giving you all one more chance to back out of this right now, because we all know that nothing good is going to come after that “but.”
… there comes a time when one has to ask whether or not the victim bears some responsibility for putting herself in this situation. Does Janay really think that will be the last time Rice gives her a beatdown? And even if she does, what statement is she making in marrying a man willing to treat her like that?
The statement is clear: she thinks the violence is a reasonable tradeoff for whatever she gets in return for her relationship, whether it’s sexual gratification, status or money. …
But feminists would have us believe that domestic violence is a patriarchal imposition, despite the fact that married women in patriarchal families suffer the lowest rates of domestic violence of all partnered women in the United States.
Price cites a previous post of his as evidence for this claim, though to declare it wildly misleading would be an understatement. While domestic violence rates among married couples are lower than among cohabiting couples, this isn’t a clean comparison; as Joanna Pepin notes on The Society Pages, it ignores “that selection out of cohabitation and into marriage – and selection out of marriage through divorce – creates an apples-and-oranges comparison between these two groups.” It’s also worth pointing out that as marriage rates have fallen over the last several decades, domestic violence rates have fallen as well.
In fact, study after study after study after study find that domestic violence rates tend to be highest amongst those with traditional – that is, patriarchal – values.
Let’s let Price continue, as we haven’t even gotten to the worst stuff yet.
Maybe feminists think the patriarchy has secretly implanted little chips in women’s brains that lead them to seek out men who will beat them up.
Somehow, instead of choosing granola-crunching lesbians, these women make a beeline for musclebound athletes, beefy bikers and ghetto thugs.
How many different types of bigotry can he fit into one sentence? I count three.
But maybe it isn’t the patriarchy. Maybe there’s something about female sexuality that defies feminist ideals. Perhaps it’s kind of a chaotic, anarchic thing that doesn’t pay attention to pronouncements about what’s right and proper.
Maybe, just maybe, the only way to really cut down on intimate violence would be to restrict women’s sexual freedom.
Well, aside from the fact that this is, uh, an utterly appalling thing to say, particularly in response to an incident in which a man knocked out his then-fiancee in an elevator, it’s also completely wrong. Indeed, studies show the opposite – that the more control women have over their lives, the less domestic violence there is.
Oh, but Price stops just short of explicitly advocating that men should be put in charge of women’s sexuality.
Would I advocate for that? No. As adults, women should make their own decisions in that regard. However, to blame men in general for the results of women’s sexual decisions is absolutely unacceptable.
As terrible as Price’s post is, the comments from The Spearhead’s regulars are, as usual, even worse.
According to the fellow who calls himself TFH,
The biggest error that Western Civ ever made was assuming that women could be ‘adults’. …
The woman’s brain-gina interface is obsolete. She is programmed to get gina tingles from men who were suited to excel in the world of pre-historic times, while she is programmed to be revulsed by the man who would have fared poorly then (the introverted STEM guys of today).
One cannot fully understand why women write love letters to serial killers and continue to get back with violent boyfriends, without also realizing the hate that women have for tech nerds, and how there is an obsessive push to divert tech money to women (i.e. they hate that money is appearing in the hands of men their gina does not tingle for).
Again, the brain-gina interface of women is obsolete. That is the most complete explanation.
I should point out that TFH – also known as The Fifth Horseman – is considered one of the leading intellectual lights of the Men’s Rights movement, with his loopy 2010 manifesto The Misandry Bubble winning praise from everyone from A Voice for Men’s favorite therapist Dr. Helen to self-promoting British MRA Mike Buchanan to crusty old Counter-Feminist Fidelbogen. Oh, and WF PRice, too.
Back in The Spearhead’s comment section, meanwhile, Eric J Schlegel trots out some evo-psych just-so stories to buttress a similarly backwards conclusion:
Women get the ‘gina tingle from the alpha male because, from an evolutionary perspective, those are the genes that contribute to survival. Trouble is, those same sociopathic thugs are not at all any use as protector and provider, so she takes the results of her selective breeding, along with her black eye, and finds a beta schlub provider to help raise them. … [P]erhaps others here have similar stories where female aquaintances chose assholes in their hormoned youth, only to settle for a nice guy with 3-4 thug bastards in tow. Women such as the one you’ve talked about here are those who have not overcome their animal instincts, every bit as much as the men who put them in ICU. The authority that a man used to have over his daughters as well as his sons used to act as somewhat of a check on this social dynamic, but we all know what happened to that…
I think it’s safe to say that if you ever run across a dude who refers to “‘ginas” instead of “vaginas” you should run as far away as your legs will take you.
Someone called Stoltz concludes
This is what happens when a society tells women they are equal – no,no – superior – to men. Movies and TV shows that show a female character acting like a hellish b*tch, goings around kicking everyone’s rearends. … Feminist and a feminist-backed government who tell women they have no responsibilities, and all the rights, so they believe they can do whatever they please to whoever (of course, the ‘whoever’ are men).
Meanwhile, another commenter suggests that the only solution is “to repeal the civil rights laws that prevent people from keeping ‘those’ people out.” Yet another declares that “Ray Rice triggers my gaydar pretty hard” and suggests that Janay “looks like a tranny.”
Price himself shows up with some comments even worse than his post, arguing that abused women stick with their abusers
because it feels good. Having a dominant man is a pleasurable feeling for a lot of women. It’s like a shot of dope for a heroin addict, who knows that he’s taking a big risk each time he injects the drug into his arm, but can’t stop himself from doing so anyway.
Just a couple days ago there was a power outage where I live due to some construction/maintenance in the area. I had to go to a nearby hotspot to do some work online and so did a few neighbors. One of my neighbors was an ordinary, middle-aged woman. She left her phone on speaker for some reason, and she got a call from her man that I heard as clear as day. He called, and then when she didn’t pick up immediately I could hear him yelling at her in a threatening manner for not answering promptly. Then, the guy demanded she get power of attorney over her mother so he could drain the old lady’s bank account, and when she raised reasonable objections to it he was insistent and angry. I was just shaking my head, but this mild-mannered, very plain 40-something white lady looked positively radiant upon receiving this kind of violent attention from her thuggish, scumbag boyfriend.
This is what English teachers like to call an “unreliable narrator.”
Actually I’d prefer condolences, if you don’t mind. Being quoted by someone like Price gives me contact dirt.
Yeah, actually I meant that kind of ironically. :/
On the other hand, the fact that Price doesn’t agree with me makes me feel good about my life choices.
Price is not the calm voice of reason in the MRA movement that comparing him to Elam and others would suggest. His mask slips easily. He frequently fails to fact-check, too. He tries to throw out enough evidence to convince the audience he’s a nice guy at heart, but then comes the tell. Boy howdy.
Honestly, at this point, I can’t see a single reason why he should be seen as being better than Elam.
I would say, if there is any difference, that it is the difference between a spitting cobra (Elam) and a regular one. I don’t want either kind in my garden.
If I’m to be part of a cat lady audience, then I must have a cat avatar!
Also, abused people are not responsible for their own abuse. You know who is responsible for abuse? The abusers. If abused women are to be compared to snake handlers or alligator wrestlers who cry when they are bitten, that implies that the abusers have no rational thought. That would follow that they should be kept in cages so they can’t hurt humans. Did Price really think that analogy through?
They don’t think anything through.
Men switch from “the smart and achieving gender” to “dumb violent beasts” according to what’s convenient to their argument.
@ John…
…Any way y’all can get him to go to detox, and while he’s in there, move a good distance away?
Just thinkin’.
Dawn Incognito – belated Hi, and is that your kitty in your avatar? 🙂
As an introverted STEM guy I really wish these people would stop claiming to be our champions.
@Gareth Hunt
#notyourshield?
Also, I’m honestly surprised that no MRAs have come around here to cry, “But what about the menz?” Or are their comments just not being allowed through?
@kittehserf
Thank you for the welcome! No, the kitty in my avatar belongs to a friend of mine, now a giant orange tom.
Don’t know if anyone posted it already, but here are the great MRA minds, in a manner of speaking (Elam, Esmay, et al.), discussing the Ray Rice situation:
I’ve not watched it (weak stomach), but someone else may be stronger and braver.
The “study after study after study after study” that you cited did not state, or conclude that intimate partner violence is highest in patriarchal o traditional marriages. NOT EVEN ONCE!
Study 1 concludes:
Despite wide variations in the prevalence of IPV, many factors affected IPV risk similarly across sites. Secondary education, high SES, and formal marriage offered protection, while alcohol abuse, cohabitation, young age, attitudes supportive of wife beating, having outside sexual partners, experiencing childhood abuse, growing up with domestic violence, and experiencing or perpetrating other forms of violence in adulthood, increased the risk of IPV. The strength of the association was greatest when both the woman and her partner had the risk factor.
Where is the statement that traditional marriages lead to greater IPV? So, you lied!
Study 2 concludes:
The relationship between patriarchal beliefs and attitudes toward violence was examined. Agreement with the statement “some women like to be hit” was equal for both men and women.
The study did not indicate how common this belief was, or whether it was promoted in patriarchal households. Again, you lied!
Study 3 concludes:
This paper proposes a conceptual model for gender differences in outcomes of intimate partner violence (IPV) victimization, broadly conceived as including physical, sexual, emotional, and coercive control forms of abuse, as well as stalking.
The purpose of the study was to see gender differences (i.e. what does IPV does to males vs females). It did not go out to examine the prevalence of IPV among traditional vs nontraditional families.
Again, you lied.
Study 4 Concludes: Masculinity leads to IPV.
How harebrained is that? Again, you lied.
Dean Esmay “Operations Manager”?
ROFLMAO!
Dave, dude, you should probably read beyond the abstract of a study.
Study #1, for instance, pretty clearly concludes that:
Emphasis mine. So yeah, patriarchal societies lead to greater IPV. This is exactly what the study concluded.
I’ll go through the other ones, too.
@Dave,
What sorts of marriages do you imagine are more likely to have “attitudes supportive of wife beating”, dipshit?
Sorry in advance for the teal deer.
Study #2is behind a paywall, but the abstract reads:
The idea that “women like to be hit” is a patriarchal idea. The study wasn’t looking at frequency, it was looking at whether or not holding patriarchal beliefs leads to a greater acceptance of IPV. The study apparently concludes it does.
Damn paywalls. Study #3 is also behind a paywall, but this study also says exactly what David says it does:
Again, emphasis mine. The bolded sentence is pretty much the definition if patriarchy. In a patriarchal society, men are afforded more power than women, thus making women more vulnerable to IPV. This means, of course, that in patriarchal societies women are more at risk for IPV.
Dave, I think your the one who’s lying here, not Mr. Futrelle.
Someone already put “linking to studies that don’t say what you think they do” on the bingo card list, right?
And, Study #4 also is behind a paywall. This is the abstract:
So, basically, they’re looking at what factors, exactly, contribute to the linking of masculine ideology and myths of IPV (that is, people who are more likely to hold ideology that puts “masculine” above “feminine” [i.e., patriarchy] are also more likely to believe in myths about IPV). They analyzed three traits, “fear of intimacy,” “ambivalent sexism,” and “relationship dominance” (three traits that make up masculine ideology) and found that just two of those (“ambivalent sexism” and “relationship dominance”) were linked. So, no, it’s not just, as you put it, Dave:
Not by a long shot.
Way to read, Dave. Wanna try again?
@sparky I have superhero abilities with paywall stuff. If there’s every any articles you want, please feel free to email me at my nym and gmail
cloudiah:
Thank you. If its okay, I may take you up on that offer sometime in the future. I have long-term plans to go back to school.