Imagine for a moment that you are a guy living in Western Australia. You are enduring periodic violent outbursts from your partner, and one night you go online looking for help. You come across the following web page:
Now I ask you, would you be likely to contact this agency for help? Or would you think, “I’m embarrassed enough already, I don’t want to speak with people who are going to automatically assume that I am the one responsible for the violence.”
Personally I think the web page displays disgraceful anti-male bias and so on 19 May 2014 I emailed the relevant agency stating:
Please be advised – and surely I should not need to inform your department of this fact – but there are in fact such people as female perpetrators of IPV and male victims of IPV. Indeed some studies assert that there is symmetry between genders, ie. equal or almost equal numbers of male/female victims/perpetrators.
If your staff are not aware of this fact then please circulate and study the list of references provided below. As it stands now, the content of your web page is outrageously biased against men and should be re-written to be gender-neutral and not suggest to all readers all men are perpetrators of DV.
For your attention and action at the earliest opportunity please.”
I received the following reply the next day:
“Thank you for your email dated 19 May concerning the language used to describe the roles of the Men’s and Women’s Domestic Violence Helplines.
The Men’s Domestic Violence Helpline is funded to provide telephone based counselling, information, support and referral for men who self- identify as at risk of, or who are using violence. It is acknowledged that both women and men can be victims of family and domestic violence. Should a man experiencing such violence contact the Men’s Domestic Violence Helpline he would be provided with any necessary services and supported accordingly by the telephone counsellor. Counsellors are experienced and their training enables them to identify all scenarios and work with the caller and their presenting issues.
Women’s Domestic Violence Helpline is funded to provided telephone based counselling, information, support and referral for women who are experiencing family and domestic violence.
This is the purpose of the Helplines and the description provided on the website reflects as such.
For all individuals and families who are experiencing violence, the Department for Child Protection and Family Support also provides the following support options:
24/7 Crisis Care service, this is a crisis intervention service providing an immediate response to an individual or family experiencing a crisis, examples include any person experiencing family and domestic violence.
Family helpline, 24/7 telephone counselling service providing counselling, support, information and referral to an individual or family experiencing a range of issues.
These services are also on the department’s website.
I hope this response has been useful in advising you of the department’s services to those who are experiencing family and domestic violence from all perspectives. Thank you again for your email.”
And on the 21 May I wrote back to the department saying:
“Thank you for your prompt response to my concerns regarding the content of the web page provided in relation to your helplines. I take it from your response that you do not consider that the wording of the page displays undue bias against men, and consequently you do not propose to amend the content of the page.
We do however agree on the key point that there are both male and female aggressors and male and female victims of aggression, and that all should have access to support and assistance from your organisation.
It is my position, as I think it would be that of any reasonable person reading your web page, that the second sentence of each respective paragraph implies that your service is provided for the use of males who are aggressors and females who are victims, viz.:
“This service provides support and counselling for women experiencing family and domestic violence”, and “This service provides counselling for men who are concerned about becoming violent or abusive.”
I see no reason why the wording used in relation to the two helplines should not be identical, and I would suggest that such an amendment would be entirely appropriate. Consider for example the following suggested re-wording:
WOMEN’S DOMESTIC VIOLENCE HELPLINE
The Women’s Domestic Violence Helpline is a state wide 24 hour service. This service provides support and counselling for women who are either experiencing family or domestic violence OR who are concerned about becoming violent or abusive. Our service offers phone counselling, information and advice, referral to local advocacy and support services, liaison with police if necessary and support in escaping situations of family and domestic violence. The service can refer women to safe accommodation if required.
Telephone (08) 9223 1188 Free call 1800 007 339
MEN’S DOMESTIC VIOLENCE HELPLINE
The Men’s Domestic Violence Helpline is a state wide 24 hour service. This service provides support and counselling for men who are either experiencing family or domestic violence OR who are concerned about becoming violent or abusive. Our service offers phone counselling, information and advice, referral to local advocacy and support services, liaison with police if necessary and support in escaping situations of family and domestic violence. The service can refer men to safe accommodation if required.
Telephone (08) 9223 1199 Free call 1800 000 599
Darren, I do hope you will give these suggestions due consideration and that you will see merit in removing the gender bias evident in the current page content, via making the proposed amendments. I firmly believe that the current bias is not just discriminatory and inappropriate in a general sense, but would surely also alienate men who might otherwise seek sympathetic assistance from your organization. I look forward to receiving your further response in due course.”
I never received a response to my email, but while I was waiting I scanned the various publications available in the Department’s web site. Unsurprisingly, they also display a high degree of gender bias against men. Some examples:
See page 7 under definition of ‘perpetrator’ where it helpfully points out that “some women also offend against their children“, but that it’s not their fault as “sometimes this reflects an attempt to prevent greater harm from the primary perpetrator of violence …” And yes, that would be a man.
If you too feel that the Department should adopt a more professional and gender-neutral approach then I suggest you make your views known to the relevant Minister, the Honourable Helen Morton MLC (email to Minister.Morton@dpc.wa.gov.au). Alternatively, or in addition to a Ministerial letter, it might be appropriate to lodge a complaint in relation to sex discrimination.
Still in Western Australia, I noted a phrase in this March 2015 article about a new form of restraining order that is very telling in terms of its inherent anti-male bias:
“Family violence starts usually with the partner controlling every aspect of a woman’s life, the banking, who they speak to, where they go,” [Police Minister Liza Harvey] said.
I guess Liza didn’t say “every aspect of their partners life” as she is of the mistaken belief that all family violence is initiated by men. Shame on you Ms Harvey! But look at the Facebook posts concerning this article – clearly not everyone is buying the feminist perspective.
If any further proof was needed that a male life was worth less than a female life, then the global media furore surrounding the activities of Boko Haram provides us with just that proof.
‘Bring back our girls’ indeed. Whilst not wishing to detract from the terrible tragedy of the kidnapped schoolgirls, the associated media coverage raises serious questions about the media’s blindness to the abuse and murder of enormous numbers of boys by both this and similar groups in Africa. Indeed most media coverage of the issues makes no mention of harm done to boys and men at all, see for example this article.
A journalist from the Wall Street Journal, Drew Hinshaw, recently did an online Q&A during which he ignored questions about why the WSJ had made no mention of the harm done to boys/men by Boko Haram. Can’t say? Won’t say? Don’t care?
Yes, you have to search on google (e.g. “what about the boys Boko Haram”) to find the few articles that have been published which actually address all those missing/killed/abused males – see this, this, this, this, this and this.
In our next example let’s move to Europe. In the 2004 paper entitled Gendercide in Kosovo,author Adam Jones investigates gendercide of men in Bosnia by excluding men:
The Men’s Rights forum on reddit.com makes for great reading if you want to get a quick handle on gender issues from a non-feminist perspective. The forum often features discussion threads that exemplify the frequently outrageous double-standards disseminated by the feminist movement and mainstream media alike.
Here’s a selection of alternative scenarios wherein which one might do well to flip genders and re-assess the situation …
Can you imagine the furore if genders were switched with this news.com.au story about female sex-tourists enjoying the skills of male Balinese prostitutes?
“The club also released a picture of a topless male model, complete with sixpack, for the big match — but it was the women’s poster which did not escape the wrath of social media.” Because … and despite …
Women kicking balls? I’d like to see that (22 January 2017) a new TV ad campaign to support women’s sport. Good goal, poorly executed … let’s continue making light of female violence. And in terms of gender-reversal … ‘Men grabbing pussy? I’d like to see that‘ saw unending scorn being poured forth upon Donald Trump … and switching genders doesn’t make it suddenly funny.
Perth man says he won’t date women who are ‘over 30 and overweight’ (5 October 2016) Article neglects to mention that women cut off men as abruptly as this (due to some perceived deficiency re: money/career/height/car/etc) every single day. The difference is man complains about getting rebuffed = loser/creep, whereas woman complains about getting rebuffed = victim/hero. Related Reddit discussion thread here.
‘I’m tired of being ashamed of my micro-penis‘ (25 September 2016) And no, I don’t anticipate a companion piece about a woman with an extremely loose vagina because it’s only OK to objectify/demean men with click-bait rubbish like this.
Journalists have used the 2016 Olympics in Rio as as opportunity to yet again demonstrate how objectification of men is OK, whilst simultaneously ranting about alleged objectification of female athletes:
36 of the Greatest Summer Olympic Bulges (3 August 2016) Cosmopolitan provides this classic display of sexist double-standards, after previously publishing an article entitled ‘Confirmed: Why men who objectify women are effing horrible‘. In a subsequent article the author makes a weak attempt at justifying publication of the earlier article. And here’s Cosmo at it again a couple of weeks later.
Reader’s comment: “It’s all very simple. Admiring female beauty is wrong. Admiring male physiques is right. When you replace ‘objectification’ with ‘admire’, you illustrate how moronic the concept is. I have asked feminists the difference between objectification and admiration, and the answer is some purported subtle difference in attitude in the mind of the beholder. Rather conveniently, only a feminist can tease this difference out, like a French pig sniffing for truffles.” (Source).
This feminist takes the classic perspective that it’s different for women to objectify men because women don’t abuse or assault men, etc. See related Reddit discussion thread here.
“Bemused onlookers praised the scorned woman’s courage as the alleged love rat jumped in his car and sped off. Stylist Connie Nakala, 28, said: “She’s brilliant. An inspiration to all women everywhere!” While Associate Nitin Sharma, 30, said: “She was very brave to do it. And good for her.””
Why do so few men turn up to hear women speak? by Ruby Hamad (10 March 2016) Australia with related Reddit discussion thread here. No reciprocal responsibility for feminists to attend MRA events. My blog post on this issue is here.
Win a date with Doctor Mike! (18 January 2016) Hands up who doesn’t think we will see ‘Win a date with Doctor Vanessa!’ anytime soon?
In this incident a female sports presenter made disparaging on-air comments about the appearance of a football player, but when he responded like-for-like then HE was the one subject to public criticism (14 January 2016)
Royal tragic kisses Harry and proposes – for third time (7 May 2015) Stalker commits (sexual?) assault but it’s said to be “cheeky” and a source of humour – after all the perp is only a girl. In this article the commission of this crime is said to “delight” the crowd.
Eight benefits of dating a younger man (27 August 2014) Read this article carefully and then imagine the sexes were reversed. Would the article have been published? What would the public reaction have been?
“If a fraternity posted a sign that branded certain women “sluts,” does anyone seriously think the fraternity would not be punished for that? That the school’s president wouldn’t condemn it and call for an investigation and hearings? That Bwog and like-minded progressive outlets wouldn’t have a conniption? But it’s okay to distribute flyers calling certain men rapists. (And which is worse, being called a “slut” or a “rapist”?)
Down boy! On training your man like a puppy (1 August 2014) This one would go down like a bomb if a man wrote it about woman, but because it’s about men it’s (meant to be) funny. Yeah right
I have been meaning to write a post about this subject for some time but today I came across an article that basically took the words right out of my mouth, and is a great introduction to the issue.
What is happening in many countries is that the issue of FGM is receiving a great deal more attention than male circumcision. This has generated an increasingly strong reaction from opponents of infant circumcision. The opposing reaction from feminists and some others, has been a combination of downplaying the actual and potential harmful effects of male circumcision, combined with exaggeration of is potential health benefits.
Some of the arguments put forward in support of circumcision include better personal hygiene, and related to that a reduced propensity to infection by STD’s including HIV/AIDS. In reality, however, in western society such benefits are marginal. Curiously one does not hear corresponding arguments that infants’ fingernails and toenails should be removed for these reasons, nor the breast buds of pubescent girls (to prevent breast cancer, which is far more prevalent than HIV).
This conflicting treatment of the GM issue for males and females is now being enshrined in an increasing number of new laws that ban FGM whilst ignoring the circumcision of male infants (example).
Further useful and/or disturbing information can be obtained from the following sources:
“uncircumcised males face an 80 per cent risk of developing a foreskin-related condition requiring medical attention” which could equate to a dab of bepanthen and extra washing – but let’s cut the little blighter anyway and be done with it.
“Consequently, the prevention of sexually transmitted infections cannot rationally be interpreted as a benefit of circumcision, and any policy of circumcision for the general population to prevent sexually transmitted infections is not supported by the evidence in the medical literature.”
The 25-year-old in an open relationship with her long-term partner (23 April 2022) And does anyone out there seriously think that any of these women will be in happy, loving relationships in ten years time? Because every man dreams of raising a family with a women whose vagina has been as busy as Grand Central Station, right?
“There was a woman I knew intimately a few times. She is today an assistant professor of literature in a university and teaches with an explicitly feminist bent, able to effortlessly write reams upon reams of stuff in that vein.
In bed, she really did prefer it when the man took the lead and she was thankful that I’d broken the ice and made the first moves and so on. Afterwards, she said some words about me acting “entitled” to sex, an accusation which I found stunning at the time seeing as how we’d never had done it if I hadn’t stuck my neck out.
So that’s how it is with feminists. They expect– nay, DEMAND– that men make the first move and, when they do, sneer at them for their effrontery and being too forward, all of which is “entitlement” in their world. Their own normative situation of feeling they ought to get sexual attention– only when wanted– without breaking a sweat to get it and having their minds read in the process is, of course, a natural birthright and not “entitlement” in any way, shape or form.” (Source)
“I remember listening to the This American Life episode on testosterone. In Act 2, when a female-to-male transgender person is interviewed, he lays out all the graphic and objectifying thoughts he now has as a man. At no point is he challenged by the interviewer Alex Blumberg in his assumption that this must be how men see the world despite the fact that he, by his own admission, is taking HUGE amounts of testosterone as part of his transition–approximately 2-3 times the amount found in a typical adult male. A common element of misandry (which incidentally the text editor is underlining in red as not being a real word) is the idea that lewd or dangerous sexual behavior is merely the logical extension of normal male impulses. “I felt like a monster” says the interviewee followed by “It made me understand men. It made me understand adolescent boys a lot.””
There is obviously a great deal of violence, oppression and areas of relative disadvantage affecting men and boys. The true extent of this is, however, suppressed by feminists and feminist sympathisers within the media, government agencies and universities because it undermines the dominant feminist narrative (men as oppressors/women as the powerless and oppressed).
I touched on this issue in a post I made on the ‘Sunrise’ Facebook page on 23 August 2014 concerning a story they ran on modern-day slavery:
“Isn’t is funny how gender is never mentioned in these stories unless women/girls are worse off? Most enslaved people are male working in primary production and construction, but most of the attention and support is directed towards the far smaller number of women is sexual servitude. Guess that might have something to do with the abundance of feminists in the media/gov’t/NGO sectors and how feminists view males as disposable.”
Workplace harassment takes a number of forms, and these may or may not be related to a worker’s gender. Whilst sexual harassment is the most often discussed, all forms of harassment or discrimination warrant serious consideration and remedial action. No-one should have to tolerate working within such an environment. Everyone deserves respect.
Thus sexual harassment, gossiping and false accusations, bullying, and gender discrimination in recruitment, promotion and management policies – all deserve attention.
If the majority of perpetrators are historically male, as is likely the case with regards to sexual harassment, then a gendered debate might be called for. What we are seeing nowadays though is more a case of systematic demonisation of male managers and staff, whilst female perpetration of sexist and abusive behaviours is downplayed or even air-brushed out of contention.
Despite the fact that both men and women can (and do) perpetrate these types of behaviours, or be victimised by them, media coverage focuses almost entirely on the victimisation of female staff (example/example/example/example/example/example and example).
The furore about sexual harassment that initially centred on the misbehaviour of Harvey Weinstein has only amplified this already heightened degree of gender bias. It has also added to the confusion regarding the boundary between acceptable and unacceptable workplace behaviour.
Men are thus, both collectively and individually, painted as the architects of toxic workplaces, and responsible for victimising a slew of women and other men. And as with so many of these issues, men are the ones held responsible for fixing the problem and judged harshly on any perceived lack of progress.
Conversely, the media generally avoids identifying women as having significant involvement in discriminatory and/or harassing patterns of behaviour.
One of the outcomes of this situation is that men are discouraged from reporting abuse, in turn reinforcing the view amongst policy-makers and managers that female perpetration is little more than a rare aberration.
‘Abuse’: Gender workplace trend erupts (27 December 2024) Australia. No mention of the gender that is primarily dishing out the abuse. No surprise there
Sydney woman welcomes new office rule men say makes them ‘uncomfortable’ (17 October 2022) The woman is a feminist canetoad, oops I mean journalist. Heaven help men complaining about being made to feel ‘uncomfortable’ … that’s a woman’s job, right? Heaven help them too, if they express interest in the view provided.
“An SNP MP has been accused of making “appalling” comments about sexual harassment during a probe into allegations she pestered a male staffer. A submission by Patricia Gibson claimed it is “discriminatory” to say the impact of sexual harassment of a man by a woman is the same as by a male against a female.”
Extracts also stated it was “highly unlikely” the complainer would have felt “any kind of physical threat or vulnerability” as a man.
Workplace equality meaningless unless ‘macho’ culture disappears, by Mary Barry, CEO ‘Our Watch’ (13 February 2017) Not content to simply ignore female perpetration/male victimisation, the author suggests the answer lies in feminising the workplace. But wait there’s more, as the author draws an even longer bow in asserting a nexus between the perceived overt masculinity of many workplaces, and the incidence of domestic violence in the community.
Not asking for it (2016) Australia. This article interviews 13 women about their experiences of sexual harassment. I guess no men were available on the day.
In this example the author again makes no mention of there being either female perpetrators or male victims of inappropriate behaviour (see Reddit discussion thread here).
Similar bias can be seen in ‘Know where the line is: Melissa Hoyer and Elizabeth Broderick address sexual harassment‘ (May 2014). Interestingly though, readers comments paint a quite different picture. This then prompts a furious backlash, with feminists asserting that others are seeking to downplay the significance of harassment of women and/or justify that harassment on the basis that women also harass men. This tends to be the pattern with articles on this topic, and I sense a great deal of pent-up frustration with the one-sided coverage of these issues.
(Addendum: Ms Broderick is now raking in plenty of $$ shaming business into conducting surveys of sexist behaviour which confirm, surprise, surprise, that they have a toxic culture that can only be remedied by feminist consultants.)
Australian women share their experiences with sexism in the workplace (16 April 2015) This typical mainstream media article about discrimination in the workplace lacks even a single reference to the fact that men experience the same or similar problems and issues. But again, take a look at the subsequent readers comments both here and at the relevant post in the news.com.au Facebook page … an avalanche of angry men and women pointing out how biased and inaccurate the article is.
‘Things my male colleagues have actually said to me‘ (10 April 2015) Don’t hold your breath waiting for part 2 ‘Things my female colleagues …’, at least not in the mainstream media. And I note that readers comments are not permitted – which is typical in the case of these anti-male hit-pieces
In contrast very little indeed, with the exception of readers comments, has been written about toxic workplaces from the male perspective. Have men been given a free pass from having to endure such experiences? Or has the plight of male victims simply been ignored, as has occurred in the case of domestic violence and sexual assault?
Unfortunately, one outcome of ignoring female perpetration/male victimisation is the relative lack of objective research. And of course as long as research bias results in such behaviour being excluded from consideration, then there is an over-reliance on conjecture and anecdotal evidence. Hardly an ideal situation in terms of getting the powers-that-be to sit up and take notice.
On that note I just google-searched using the words “My female boss …” and was surprised by the topics that automatically appeared. Try it yourself. Looks like a lot of people having problems with female supervisors. Personally, both my best and worst bosses were female. But boy, the bad ones were shockers.
Moving on, I think it’s clear that some of the behaviour that is perceived as harassment or discrimination in the workplace is a function of the different ways that men and women operate. There are gender-based differences at play, and it is hardly unreasonable to suggest that both men and women should try to understand and compromise.
This WSJ article is another in a long line of articles proposing that men need to adjust to women, but never the other way round (read the comments too). See a critique of this article here, and again I would suggest also reviewing the readers comments.
And again, this August 2016 article appearing in the pro-feminist/SJW ‘The Conversation‘ provides a remarkably one-sided view of the issue. It’s entitled ‘Calling all men! Five ways you can be a feminist at work‘, and it’s by UK academic Scott Taylor.
This provider of business training videos obviously hasn’t heard – or doesn’t care to acknowledge – that women can also be perpetrators (scroll down to ‘Employment and Workplace Issues‘).
There are a number of implications – both positive and negative – regarding the current ‘debate’ and related media coverage. One of the negative outcomes is the growing reluctance by men to work closely with individual women, as discussed in this and various other recent articles.
The following sources consider discrimination/harassment/false allegations suffered by men/boys:
Feminist instructor proudly informs readers how she discriminates against male students (15 July 2016) Australia. Reddit discussion thread with linked article.
Workplace sexism: we still don’t want to talk about it, by Kate Jenkins (1 June 2016) Australia. A sole reference to male victimisation in an article that otherwise implies sexism only affects women. I’d suggest that one reason why men “don’t want to talk about it” is the strongly gendered nature of the debate which is equal parts disinterested and dismissive of men’s concerns.
Update on Rates of Violence in Male and Female Exotic Dancers (18 May 2016) France. Reddit discussion thread with linked article – be sure to click through to the earlier study which showed roughly equal rates of harassment/abuse of male versus female performers.
Workplace (In)Equality (7 May 2016) Reddit discussion thread. On situations where men & women are paid the same but men routinely given the harder jobs.
Articles about how women treat other women/girls at work
“I can’t understand the push for more women in the workplace. My partner has just quit specifically because of problems with women at her workplace. Her sister also has quit her job from a different workplace for the same reason. This prompted me to ask other women I know if they have problems with women in the workplace.
The answers I received staggered me. I have two sisters that I could ask and both said they were having problems with women in the workplace at the moment, but never with men. My own mother when asked said to me, “to be honest with you the only problems I have had in my working life have been with women”.
I have asked now dozens of women when I get the chance, many that are friends, and every one of them say the same thing. That they find it difficult to work with women and that they are the cause of stress in the workplace for them, preferring to work with men.
I challenge readers to ask this question to women they come across. The answers I receive are amazing to me. A real problem that is either unknown or swept under the carpet in my opinion.” (Source)
How The Bachelor turns women into misogynists (18 August 2016) Read this article which tells how women only undermine other women when manipulated by TV producers … then read the papers below.
Sleep with me or be sacked (14 July 2014) with the same issue addressed here where some guy is quoted as having said: “You’ll see more sexual harassment cases in Silicon Valley [like this] because of the male dominated culture“. Here are two of the readers comments that followed:
“Don’t be shocked. My female manager harassed me for years. I was maybe 24 and single, she was probably 40, married and had 2 kids. I knew her family pretty well, which made it even more weird. For years she would come in and sit on my lap, or make comments like “If I don’t eat soon, I’m going to get goofy and rape you or something”… It was very uncomfortable. Especially since I knew her husband, and her regular “boyfriend”.. Finally, one day she was teasing me, I turned around and said, must you? She says, why is it sexual harassment? I responded, I don’t know, what if you were sitting in this chair and I was behind you tickling your neck, would that be harassment? A week or two later I got my layoff notice… So I don’t find this story hard to believe at all….”
“This is about a woman harassing another woman, but yet this running dog had to curry favor with his feminist masters and find a way to vilify men and make them responsible somehow for the wrongdoing to this female victim. Nobody can just admit that women are as prone to indulge in harassing behavior as men are”
Half of men in corporate Australia are fatigued by gender equality (24 November 2021) Entitled, condescending nonsense. Scroll through the readers comments in Twitter and elsewhere, and then imagine the same style on commentary aimed at a feminist author … it would create an absolute furor.
Gender harassment harming women in male-dominated industries (9 November 2020) Australia. You’d think that it would make sense to conduct a similar survey of men working in female-dominated industries, to provide context … but no. As I mentioned in this other post, feminists don’t want context – merely to support pre-ordained conclusions supportive of the feminist narrative.
If festival crowds can unite to help a crowd-surfer, they can unite against sexual assault (6 February 2017) Australia. This article demonstrates the prevailing mindset of only men harass/only women are harassed & it’s men’s duty to defend women. The hypocrisy of creating an assistance ‘hotline’ that only caters for women is lost on these people. See also the reader’s comments
Heinous sexist culture inside STEM industries exposed, by Liz Burke (27 January 2017) Ignores discrimination and recruitment bias against men – the implication being only women are affected. Relies heavily on anecdotes, and fails to provide corresponding statistics for men (ditto) – all typical of pro-feminist journalism/’research’.
Swedish women get hotline to report mansplaining (16 November 2016) Feminists hard at work addressing the big issues. All men magically know whether each individual woman knows more about a given topic than they do. Well all men except the misogynists it seems. NB: Women never guilty of behaving in a patronising manner.
Statistics from the UK National Workplace Bullying Advice Line and Bully OnLine reveal that at least 50% of over 6000 cases involve a female serial bully. The top four sectors for cases are teaching, nursing, social services, and the voluntary / not-for-profit sector, in which there is a higher percentage of female managers. Serial bullies, male or female, can be recognised by their behaviour profile.
Sexual harassment in politics, by Karen Middleton (15 October 2016) Australia. The article contains details of a string of incidents of gross conduct by men in the political sphere. Karen asserts “that attitude and that kind of predatory behaviour is extremely – extremely – common” (para 9), and then in the final paragraph:
“The men I’ve described are ordinary men. That’s the problem – that it is and has been ordinary to behave this way. Women don’t talk about it for lots of reasons. They fear it would damage their careers, their social lives, their relationships. But that doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen …”
No, ordinary men do not behave in this manner, and such conduct is not part of the ordinary course of events in Australian workplaces. It is certainly not “extremely common“. In fact the author admits “it was only a handful of our elected representatives who did these things“.
Karen omitted any/all incidents of female perpetration of abuse. And yet men are also victims, albeit it to a lesser extent, though they also “don’t talk about it for lots of reasons“. Whilst journalists fail in their duty to report the other part of the workplace harassment problem … “But that doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen”.
“Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull’s department is paying a feminist “change agent” almost $200,000 to conduct a three-month “cultural audit” to find and weed out any unconscious bias against women”
This person has the perfect solution for women in the workplace (2 September 2016) Because only women have to walk on eggshells due to the entitlement and/or fragile egos of their co-workers. Feminist erasure – This blogger failed to upload my comment in relation to her post.
“I am a professor and a newly minted pro vice chancellor and I have spent my entire research and working life with male bosses or supervisors. I have never reported to a woman.”
So presumably men have mentored the author throughout her career, and been instrumental in her elevation to the top job. Despite this she implies that the disproportionate number of men in senior positions is sinister, given their inherent propensity to exercise power to the benefit of men. Greater gender equity is only achievable through listening to women’s voices. Men should be grateful for sound guidance that women shall provide … and for any incidental rewards that may come their way. Oh wait, I get it, those men, the first lot, they were different.
(As a footnote: I sent three tweets in response to this article (see Twitter stream 15 July 2016) and was immediately blocked by the author. What a curiously inept response for someone so obviously well-credentialled to attempt to defend her position.
Middle-aged women bosses more at risk of sexual harassment, finds study (30 June 2016) I can’t locate the results of the Australian Journal of Public Administration study cited in the article anywhere online … if anyone reading this can provide a link, then pls let me know. Thanks in advance.
Most people were sickened to learn of this violent unprovoked attack on an old man in Australia, which was subsequently discussed in this rather insightful article by Jim Muldoon. One perpetrator subsequently went to court in September 2014 and walked free on a good behaviour bond. No surprise there.
This was not an isolated episode though, and there have been many recent instances of violent crimes involving female perpetrators. Including more attacks on the elderly man (a 2018 example). Indeed, the numbers of women committing violent crime is increasing significantly. Further, the gap between the rate at which violent crimes are committed by men and women is slowly narrowing as male perpetration has either plateaued or declined in many jurisdictions. This trend casts further doubt on the veracity of claims that the number of male victims of domestic assault is inconsequential.
“A third of family murders involved a female as the killer. In sibling murders, females were 15% of killers, and in murders of parents, 18%. But in spouse murders, women represented 41% of killers. In murders of their offspring, women predominated, accounting for 55% of killers” (Source)
The paragraph above was extracted from a 1994 publication, not because patterns of gender perpetration have changed greatly but because the feminist filter has been imposed so completely now that we only see articles like this one that present statistics in a manner that suggests that women are the perpetual victims of oppressive male malevolence. (Reddit discussion thread here)
The first group of linked articles/papers below explore the general issue of violence by females. A second and subsequent collection of links relate to specific acts of violence by women/girls.
Given all of the above it’s frightening how few anger management programs there are available for women here in Australia. In fact the only dedicated program of which I am aware is LifeWorks. If you know of others then please let me know and I will list them here.
Links to online sources dealing with the issue of violence by women/girls (other than specific incidents or case studies)
Australian Domestic Violence Homicide Statistics 2018 (19 June 2018) Most DV-related homicides in the first half of 2018 were committed by women. A reality very much at odds with the misandric messages issued by the feminists who have adopted the Eurydice Dixon tragedy as their current cause celebre.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_suicide_bomber A google search on the words ‘female suicide bomber’ will also reveal many papers on the subject as well as details of specific incidents that have appeared in the media (example).
“Women have increasingly assumed more operational roles in jihadist terrorism activities, as have minors and young adults. One in four (26%) of the arrestees in 2016 were women, a significant increase compared to 2015 (18%)” (Source)
“The February CDC study found that, over their lifetime, 44% of lesbians had been physically assaulted by a partner (more than two-thirds of them only by women), compared to 35% of straight women, 26% of gay men, and 29% of straight men.”
“Teens cheer as schoolgirl bashed, thrown down stairs“. By another girl – though that bit’s left out of the headline (15 March 2022). Crime occurred at Bundaberg, Queensland. Article is behind the Courier-Mail paywall.
Girl’s teeth knocked out in alleged bashing (6 February 2020) See how far you need to read through the article before it’s disclosed that the attackers were female. Do you think that would have been the case if they were male? Most unlikely
One of many video clips on the net showing a woman beating a man in public, with no-one intervening … until the male strikes back. More such videos can be seen in this post. (September 2019)
“An 11-year-old girl is in a stable condition in a Melbourne hospital with multiple gunshot wounds, after a supermarket brawl between two women allegedly later led to a shooting”
Man shot at Labrador (22 August 2016) Why are both the media and police so coy (i.e. gender neutral) when the perpetrator is a female? The man subsequently died. At least this article told it as it was.
The policeman was quoted as saying “I certainly don’t condone the behaviour but I can certainly see the funny side of it as well.” Bet he wouldn’t have said that if a man had pushed him.
Court documents reveal Jackson, who only got her licence back in January after a two-year driving ban, has twice had restraining orders taken out against her, both by ex-boyfriends in 2012.
One of the men claimed to have received 72 phone calls from Jackson in a single day. He accused her of later trying to break into his house through a bedroom window after leaving menacing voicemail messages, including “I’m going to hurt you”.
The Unknown History of Misandry A comprehensive blog that discusses the issue of female sociopaths and serial killers, featuring innumerable case-studies
Fathers rights comprises both a very important set of social issues, as well as a highly visible and significant component both within and beyond the MHRA movement.
Anyway I will start the ball rolling by mentioning an article in the ‘Genderratic’ web site entitled ‘The Feminist Crusade against Fatherhood‘. One notable feature of this well-researched article is that it provides a historical background to the issues of child custody and the provision of financial maintenance.
Various papers concerning, or of concern to, fathers
The Fatherless Generation (undated, but assumed to be circa 2010-2020). Blog posts and statistics in relation to the effects of fatherlessness
Chris Mackney was a father who was driven to commit suicide due to his treatment at the hands of an abusive wife and a legal system that is strongly biased towards the rights of woman. Read more about Chris here.
You’ve probably noticed that one of the many, many criticisms of men is that they don’t help out with family/household as much as they should (& women already do). And yet men who choose to become house-husbands are often viewed with disdain. This phenomenon is apparent in this reddit discussion thread.
Bettina Arndt has asked me to raise awareness of an alternative Australian family law resolution service offered by Professor Patrick Parkinson, which you can read about here.
Dad’s DNA Nightmare: Your legal questions answered (13 February 2017) Men can’t win. When you read this story, and then others about non-biological parents (men) who are forced to pay child support until age 18 even when DNA evidence is available!
Child psychologist Penelope Leach says sleepovers at dads ‘may damage brain’ (18 May 2014) Unbelievable that the media would publicise such views, and imagine the uproar from the feminist lobby if the genders were reversed. In this article the author of the study cited by Ms. Leach rebukes for misrepresenting his findings. Imagine that, a feminist misrepresenting the actual facts in order to further their own ideology … who would have thought?
“…an estimated 50,000 persons are kept in jail or in prison on any given day in the U.S. for child support arrears.” (13 January 2012) Statistics such as this need to be probed, but with feminists controlling the relevant government agencies we know that is not going to happen anytime soon. For example, how many of these men are not the biological parent of the child in question? How many women are not paying their share of child support, and what percentage of them are being jailed? etc
We are now witnessing a continual stream of articles about women sexually abusing underage boys and girls, most commonly involving teachers in secondary schools. I have listed a representative sample below, but a review of non-MSM news sites and discussion fora will often reveal similar articles on a daily basis.
And yet despite this, most articles concerning pedophilia in the mainstream media imply that men are almost always the ones responsible for crimes of this nature. Further, when female perpetration is addressed in the media it is often softened through the use of terms such as tryst/romp/relationship or ‘seduced’, rather than – for example – ‘assaulted’ or ‘raped’.
A combination of factors are, or may be, underpinning this increasing public exposure of female sexual assaults on under-aged victims:
increased numbers of women engaging in this type of behaviour
mobile phones that can take photos are everywhere, so the chance of evidence reaching the public domain is greater than ever before
increased willingness of (fringes of) the media to publicise the issue
a cultural backdrop involving the progressively earlier sexualisation of children
increased willingness of victims to come forward and/or for their parents to press for charged to be laid
And further, it should come as no surprise that this is an issue about which the feminist lobby falls strangely silent. The closest they come to that involves harsh criticism of the real and/or alleged behaviour of male students – especially in all-boys schools. It’s a heck of a lot easier than acknowledging flaws in the feminist narrative and/or teaching women not to rape.
In this first set of links you can access general sources that address this issue:
Reporting on child sexual abuse: Guidance for media (2023) Australian National Office for Child Safety. Refer in particular to page 23, where it discussed the use of language by the media in describing child abuse. What isn’t noted is that this flavouring and sanitising of stories is far more commonplace in cases where the victims are male.
Women also sexually abuse children, but their reasons often differ from men’s (20 February 2017) Easy to imagine the howls of ‘rape apologist’ is something similar was written by a man concerning male offenders. The author not only seeks to minimise the culpability of female offenders, but does so in the context of a statistical backdrop that she admits is patchy and unreliable.
“The whole “teacher/lover” hypothesis is nothing more than a perpetuation of the BS gender stereotypes that lead to female sexual predators getting away with their crimes even after being caught: the notion that male sexuality is perverted and male abusers get off on sex and power, and that female sexuality is loving and romantic and female abusers fall in “love” and have “affairs”. So it’s not as bad because women never intend to abuse or harm; they’re just lonely and need love, affection, and sympathy!
FXXK this author. It’s all confirmation bias. People need to see males as abusers, thus when a man texts the under-aged girl saying he loves her, people interpret that as him deliberately grooming and manipulating her. But when a woman texts an under-age boy the same thing, people just assume she must be genuine because they can’t see women as true abusers.
The behaviors aren’t the primary difference; what is different, is people’s perception of the behaviors, namely seeing women abusing young boys to be out of need for “love/intimacy” and men abusing to be out of a perverted drive for sex. Society can no longer ignore the increase of female sexual abusers coming to light, but there’s too much cognitive dissonance to question the male = abuser/female = victim ideal, so instead they basically say “sure, there are a lot of women doing it, but it’s just different and men are still the real threats””
“They don’t seem to be pedophiles like men,” said Hollida Wakefield, who has studied and treated sex offenders for more than 20 years at the Institute of Psychological Therapies in Minnesota.
“There are some cases where some people are in bad relationships or marriages and are just really lonely, and they find themselves in a relationship with these children,” she said. “It isn’t so much that women are sexually aroused.”
Female teacher sex crime accusations (13 July 2019) This article provides an estimate of the gender ratio of teachers who are abusing students, one third of which are said to be females. But as one commenter states, one might find that the incidence of boys reporting the abuse might well be lower than in the case of female students.
“The allegations were referred to the local authority via safeguarding procedures and reported to the police. No further action was taken by the police”
Aldine ISD teacher surrenders on sex charge (1 June 2016) USA. “Harris County prosecutors say Vera had sex with a 13-year-old student almost daily for nine months”. See related Reddit discussion thread here.
Lauren Harrington-Cooper (30 September 2014) This case, and the issues arising from it, is discussed at length here. Here Lauren is interviewed on TV and the hosts rationalise it away on the basis that she simply wanted attention and the students got a buzz out of it.
Loren Morris (19 March 2014) ‘Female paedophile, 21, is jailed for two years after she had sex with an eight-year-old boy 50 times, starting when she was 16’
“The judge in the case told Morris that he would be lenient with the sentence – which will see her released from jail after one year – because she ‘realised it was wrong’ and stopped having sex with the boy.” After two years! Pussy-pass!
