New Zealand journalist labels men as the ultimate predators

I had the misfortune to read an article in the NZ Herald entitled ‘No predator more dangerous than the human male‘ by Rachel Stewart.

This is the self-same journo who last year informed us that There’s no doubt that New Zealand’s epidemic of domestic violence lies firmly at the feet of men. As does the solution.Oh dear, someone hasn’t bothered to even dip their toe into that extensive body of domestic violence research that didn’t pass through the feminist filter.

But back to yesterday’s article about men as predators. You can probably guess the bulk of its contents. Comparisons between men and different wild animals. The writer alleging the receipt of abuse and death threats for speaking out for women. (Presumably these threats came from male predators, because feminists don’t do stuff like that) And then some more about men being horrible. Oh, and a bit of Trump-bashing to freshen up those other tired feminist cliques.

The final paragraph read:

“Before I hear you shriek “not ALL men”, how about you good guys start calling out the bad guys, as well as sexual predators. Because you know who they are.”

Yes that’s right all bad guys show a secret sign that only other men can see, and which signals that they are bad. If only the good men then did their duty, presumably by way of citizens arrests or possibly even summary execution, allowing the womenfolk to remain safe whilst going about their business.

Thankfully there are no bad women, thus the issue of good women having responsibility for calling them out is moot. We can disregard the countless rare aberrations detailed in the following blog posts as but rambling inventions of an unhinged MRA and his vast army of similarly brain-washed academics, journalists, public servants, etc:

On violence perpetrated, or instigated, by women and girls
Regarding female perpetration of paedophilia and underage sex
On deaths related to domestic violence
On recognising and supporting male victims of domestic violence
Mostly female perpetrators, so child abuse is a gendered crime then?
The often contrasting media reaction when mums and dads kill their children

Rachel went on to tweet:

stew5To which I responded:

stew3

The article to which I linked was this fabulous offering from Janet Bloomfield (aka ‘Judgy Bitch’). Please take a moment to read it now if you are not familiar with this work.

Heavy lifting” by feminists … what a joke! If there’s any lifting to be done they just start a hashtag and recruit some gullible white knights to get down and dirty.

And after that, quelle surprise!

stew1

stew2

Hmm. Well given the choice between being a vile gender bigot clinging to a tainted ideology that will without doubt soon find itself on the wrong side of history … and being thick … I think I’ll settle for the latter.

Finally, here is a link to the page that tells people how to lodge complaints regarding material published in the NZ Herald. That is, of course, if you can spare a few moments away from all that predation.

Advocating for men/boys online: How much benefit to be had in one-on-one interaction with feminists?

I notice many MRA’s spend what seems to be an inordinate amount of time trading barbs with feminists online. I’m curious as to why they bother.

My own online interactions with feminists and their allies have been singularly unproductive. They very rarely provide interesting alternative perspectives or leads to useful sources of information. Instead they offer a narrow and predictable range of ad hominem barbs and child-like taunts.

After these exchanges I get the feeling that I have achieved nothing more than diverting time and energy away from those other things that might have been tackled in the limited time available – for example, targetted lobbying, preparing submissions, etc. Occasionally I’ve also had to expend further time afterwards dealing with subsequent unfounded/exaggerated complaints to moderators, Facebook, etc.

It’s for this reason I prefer to contribute in public forums (e.g. online discussions of articles in MSM) where I try to raise awareness amongst the general public of specific mens issues, and of related sources of information.

But perhaps if we look at a couple of case-studies:

In this first example what began with a little banter in relation to one of my blog posts, ended with a door slam. mangina3

Followed soon thereafter by:

mangina

This second example demonstrated pretty much the same pattern as you can see in these few screen grabs:


Anyway I thought I’d take this opportunity to put the question to far more seasoned campaigners than I … once you add up all the time and energy spent dealing with individual feminists, is there a net benefit to be had? Were they interested in your facts? Have you won over any hearts and minds? Talked them out of feminism?

blocking

Or have you just found yourself, time and time again, switching off your laptop late for dinner … tired and frustrated and thinking there must be a better way?

Partners in alms: A primer on the ‘Domestic Violence Industry’

The most visible elements of the Domestic Violence lobby in Australia are advocacy groups such as ‘Our Watch‘ and ‘White Ribbon Campaign‘, and front-line service provides such as ‘DV Connect‘ and ‘Domestic Violence NSW‘. There are however several more significant pieces in this jigsaw, including:

  • Feminist politicians and male colleagues imbued with a surfeit of chivalry (aka ‘white knights’)
  • Feminists and their allies leading or working within state and federal public agencies such as, for example, the Department of Social Services and the Australian Human Rights Commission
  • Feminists leading or working within academia and in market research/consultancy companies, and
  • Feminist and ‘white knight’ journalists and media commentators

‘Six degrees of Kevin Bacon’ is a parlour game based on the six degrees of separation concept, which posits that any two people on Earth are six or fewer acquaintance links apart.

I would suggest that an even closer degree of inter-connectivity exists between those involved in the Australian Domestic Violence Industry (ADVI). The links in this web comprise mutually-beneficial flows of tangible and intangible benefits such as funding/employment opportunities, power/prestige, and a sometimes misguided sense of achieving greater social justice.

Each of these groups or individuals perform an important function within the network, the unifying theme being a shared desire to maintain and expand the network and to defend it against perceived threats.

I would hazard a guess that many of these individuals share very similar demographic characteristics, with further points of commonality that include:

  • having studied the same university courses
  • enjoying social and/or personal relationships with others in the network, and
  • there being varying degrees of financial inter-dependency between them

The tangible outputs of this particular industry should encompass offering support for victims and perpetrators of domestic violence, facilitating training of front-line workers who provide that support, and public education concerning the nature of domestic violence and available avenues of assistance.

The ADVI’s public education function has, however, been subverted to disseminating propaganda that is heavily imbued with feminist dogma. This has the effect of generating heightened hysteria which serves to generate further public/political support. It has created a deeply misrepresentative picture of the nature of the problem, and hence the nature of the most appropriate policy response.

One particularly egregious aspect of the ‘community education‘ undertaken by the ADVI is diverting attention from the growing incidence of violent behaviour by women, whilst engaging in the wholesale demonization of men within the community.

Anyway let’s turn our attention now to the really important stuff – are these people getting runs on the board in terms of reducing the incidence and severity of domestic violence? For if they were then I might be inclined to keep these other concerns to myself. The reality is though that, as best we can tell, they seem to be making little or no progress at all.

How is the ADVI’s effectiveness measured? Well for the most part it isn’t, and that’s a big part of the problem. Most industries have measures of output, sometimes known as ‘key performance indicators’ (KPI). An obvious KPI for the ADVI would be the incidence of domestic violence in the community. But based on what the ADVI itself is telling us though, that figure is moving in the wrong direction (think descriptors like ‘epidemic’).

On the issue of  KPI’s, I came across a table in this article entitled ‘Survey of public information on key performance indicators for combating domestic violence in Australian jurisdictions‘. Sadly I note that the performance indicators for national, ACT, Tasmania, South Australia and Victorian government don’t address the safety of all citizens, only that of women and children.

In July 2016, a pro-feminist government agency (ANROWS) released a report that might constitute the first attempt to evaluate efforts to reduce the incidence of domestic violence against women. The summary included the following observations:

“Most evaluations used a mixed-methods design but few had robust outcome measures and none assessed the relative impact of specific components, so the authors were unable to identify effective components or service models.”

“To build an evidence base on effective integration, the report found that future evaluations should be theory-driven, measurement focused and comprehensive, including process, output and outcome indicators.”

Every industry includes dedicated and hard-working people who make a positive contribution. In the case of the ADVI however, an inordinate amount of energy and resources are devoted to simply sustaining itself … and to ballooning ever larger.

On that note, I have noticed a recent trend whereby larger players in the DVI are ‘up-sizing’ their services (and income streams) through a strategy of extending their influence and claimed expertise into other areas such as workplace harassment and in-school ‘educational’ programs.

Most of those calling for more money to be spent on domestic violence appear to be labouring under the misapprehension that the government is spending very little in its battle against domestic violence. Their memories extend no further back, nor broader than, the latest trumpeted hand-out. In truth, and in contrast, the amounts involved are quite staggering.

The total outlay towards combatting domestic violence, whilst difficult to accurately measure, is certainly be in the order of hundreds of millions of dollars. This was confirmed in a statement in 2015 by (now Prime Minister) Malcolm Turnbull:

“The fact is there are hundreds of millions, billions of dollars, spent across government that address issues connected to and related to domestic violence. You know, look at money that goes into homelessness, for example.”

It’s most troubling that no-one seems to have produced a detailed tally of how much money has been injected into the ADVI at the federal and state/territory level, including how funds were spent, by whom, and what the outcomes were. Not the media, nor feminist advocacy groups, not even hugely costly government inquiries.

Such an exercise would be difficult, but certainly not impossible. All that is required is sufficient political will to compile such a resource. The main difficulty arises because applicable funds would be allocated in various different portfolios even, for example, within a particular jurisdiction. Then again, such references usually only appear in the public domain when they paint a politically palatable picture. Perhaps that’s the real issue here.

A 2014 paper produced by the Parliament House library, although woefully incomplete, is one possible starting point in compiling such a spreadsheet. It’s weakness is that it only provides details of the dollar value of some of the relevant federal funding, and nothing whatsoever regarding state/territory funding.

One indicator of the scale of expenditure at the state level is provided in the 2016 report of the Victorian Royal Commission into Family Violence, which informs us that “the Victorian Government estimates that funding for programs and services aimed at dealing with family violence in 2014–15 was $80.6 million” (p41).

A few further snippets of info can be gleaned from this other blog post wherein I briefly examine several feminist advocacy groups, noting both the level of public funding received and the nature of expenses incurred by each.

Recent financial statements for advocacy groups ‘Our Reach‘ and ‘White Ribbon Australia‘, for example, tell us that most of the funding received goes into the pockets of staff, directors and consultants. The average staff salary within such organisations is in excess of $80,000/year, consistent with information obtained from an online salary comparison site (pictured).

payscaleRegrettably though, only a trickle of money subsequently makes its way past generously-rewarded tertiary-educated femocrats and consultants to reach front-line workers assisting female victims of violence.

Clearly, maintaining, building and controlling this torrent of public funding is central to what is at stake in maintaining the circle of influence that is the ADVI.

It is only common-sense to recognise that when one combines the elements listed below, one creates an environment in which substantial waste might occur and in which corrupt conduct could flourish:

  • a significant degree of cronyism
  • federal and state governments that equate being seen to care about an issue, with throwing money at it, with the aim of fashioning electoral popularity
  • little accountability and poorly defined or non-existent review or audit processes with regards to the expenditure of public funds
  • an ‘ends justifies the means’ mind-set borne from ideological fervency.

Regardless of whether criminal intent is present, or simply misguided or self-serving behaviour, the key common-sense questions that need to be answered include:

Exactly how much public money has been spent by federal/state/territory government in recent years? Who received it?

Have public funds been distributed fairly, responsibly and cost-effectively? To what extent has auditing or program evaluation occurred, and was this done independently?

Are the resourcing decisions that emerge from this feminist milieu in the long-term best interests of the broader Australian community?

The subject of feminist enterprise centred around the issue of domestic violence has been addressed by well-known Canadian MRA Karen Straughan:

“Violence against women in any form has been a HUGE cash cow for feminism. The more they inflate their claims regarding its pervasiveness in society, the more money pours in, and the more power they have to tinker with legislation and policy. Because it is such an emotionally charged subject, any rational scepticism of these claims (as to whether they are true in the first place, or whether feminists are accurate in their estimates of pervasiveness), is easily deflected by attacking the sceptic.”

“You can demonstrate until the cows come home just how much certain feminists are profiting from generating an inflated fear of violence against women among the public (the average [almost always feminist] director of a battered women’s shelter here in Alberta rakes in over $100k/year, and in the US, that number can be significantly higher), and people won’t care, because ending violence against women is THAT important. They won’t see the people who claim to be working to end it as the exploitative con-artists or ideologically driven religious inquisitors that they are.

If you point out that a very lucrative industry has formed around these issues, and that like any organic entity, this industry will work to sustain and grow itself rather than the other way around, you get called a conspiracy theorist. Even though none of these claims require a conspiracy to be valid–all they require is human nature.”

Another good paper concerning the nature of the domestic violence industry can be found here (Dalrock, July 2013).

In closing I would make one further observation in relation to the ‘old girls club’ character of the ADVI. Most organisations within the ADVI have a board of directors and/or an advisory group. Whilst my research was hardly exhaustive, I was unable to find a single example of a board or advisory group that included representation by a men’s group or fathers group. This exclusion of relevant stake-holders, and general lack of gender diversity, is accentuated by the fact that many DV-related organisations have few or nil male employees. Surely this is very much at odds for a movement that elsewhere stridently champions the benefits of gender diversity and inclusiveness?

Let’s take the example of WESNET who state that they work “within a feminist framework“, which most would assume to include a strong commitment to gender equality. And yet in the next breath, WESNET supports women only management committees as most appropriate to women and children focussed services and to services employing women only.”

WESNET makes a feeble effort at an appearance of objectivity, stating that although “pro-women; this has sometimes been misconstrued as meaning “anti-men” but this is not the case.” Yet search as I did I could not find a single admission regarding female perpetration of violence nor an expression of support for male victims of their violence.

Another similar example is an allied organisation known as AWAVA, whose advisory board is entirely female.

Finally in this interview with Rosie Batty on the ABC’s 7:30 program, Rosie discloses her frank assessment of likely progress in combating DV in Australia (based on continued reliance on the feminist/Duluth approach):

“HAYDEN COOPER: … We’ve all heard that horrendous statistic of one in three women who’ve experienced physical violence. Have you seen any sign yet that that statistic, that figure is improving?

ROSIE BATTY: Look, it’s going to be a heck of a long time before we start to see changes to our statistics turn around.” (Source)

Well no-one can accuse Rosie of setting the bar too high. Meanwhile just keep signing those cheques.

rebecca

 

 

 

 

 

neave

See also:

An illuminating account of the early history of the DV shelter movement

Cory Bernardi is using provocative motions to make ideological points in the Senate (16 November 2017) showing how DV organisations can/do attempt to influence policy in other areas in support of feminist ideology. See rebuttal from Corrine Barraclough here.

DV Connect chief executive Diane Mangan axed from role amid dispute (8 November 2017)

Senior Australian public servants demonstrating their unswerving support for the feminist narrative and the DVI (12 April 2017) Video

Feminists against men’s domestic violence shelters (24 May 2017) Video

Victorian budget 2017: record spending to break family violence (2 May 2017) Open wide all those feminist snouts!

“The same policies will only produce the same tragedies. That’s why I promised to change it all.” So said Premier Andrews, and yet the same fundamental approach is to be followed – with the addition of all those millions more taxpayer dollars. In other words an approach underpinned by feminist ideology/the Duluth Model, and with ‘awareness’ and support services run by the same feminist lobby groups who have previously received funds in the past. And this despite those groups shunning male victims, turning a blind eye to female perpetrators, and producing no measurable improvement in the incidence of DV.

Family Violence Workforce Census (April 2017) Interesting to see the feminist Victorian Government acknowledging this glad-handing network as an ‘industry’. Further details available here.

Our Watch charity invited to assess its own schools gender equity program (4 February 2017) An obvious conflict of interest, but might as well keep the $$ within the family, right?

Domestic Violence Industry: Nights with Miranda Devine (12 January 2017) Miranda talks with Sex Therapist, Psychologist and Men’s rights activist, Bettina Arndt about the misuse of AVO’s and the industry that surrounds it. Australia

The White Ribbon Breakfast ~ where the cash cow meets the gravy train (28 October 2016)

Feminist charity quits Scottish Women’s Aid network in dispute over male director (21 October 2016) UK. Related Reddit discussion thread here.

Domestic violence double standards – male MP was forced to stand down when cautioned for assaulting partner yet Sarah Champion receives support for same crime (26 September 2016) UK

UK Domestic Violence Charities’ Finances (16 September 2016) Recommended reading.

“What is the overall level of public funding to UK Domestic Violence (DV) charities? The answer is not widely known (is it known at all outside the closed doors of the sector itself?). The financing of the DV sector is obscure partly because of the many hundreds of different charities in the sector.” Just as is the case in Australia

Exposing the fraudulent DV lobby (9 September 2016)

Bashing of ‘domestic violence industry’ beyond the pale, by Anne Summers (3 September 2016) Wishy-washy defence of the ADVI that avoids ALL of the points of criticism, relying primarily on the straw-man argument that if you disrespect the ADVI then you are also disrespecting victims of domestic violence:

“How despicable – and un-Australian – for politicians and journalists to so cruelly mock those who suffer racism or violence with the ugly inference that they are just fodder for an “industry””

“the people who work to end the epidemic”? Firstly there is no “epidemic”, and secondly I am unaware of any evidence to support the assertion that the feminist ADVI is doing anything to “end” it … or even reduce it.

Vested interests ‘have taken over the domestic violence debate’: Leyonhjelm (26 August 2016)

Always beating up on men, by Bettina Arndt (20 August 2016) with introductory piece here

The Domestic Violence Industry – Parts 1 & 2 (17 July 2016 & 6 August 2016)

Stop the man-bashing: It’s time to fight back against feminism, by Corrine Barraclough (29 July 2016) Australia

Victoria Is Spending More Money On Domestic Violence Than The Federal Government (15 July 2016)

Revealed: The Lavish Spending That Brought Down Britain’s Only LGBT Domestic Abuse Charity (5 July 2016) UK, with related Reddit discussion thread here

Public money wasted on domestic violence organisations, by Bettina Arndt (9 July 2016) More than 180 readers comments at last count, the vast majority of which support Bettina’s position on the matter.

ACT government dreams up a new way to top up the coffers of the DVI – A domestic violence levy, by Angela Shanahan (18 June 2016)

F4J call for inquiry into violence & drug taking at contact handover involving Domestic Violence charity in Greenwich (17 May 2016) UK

Domestic violence ad campaign to focus on ‘influencers’ in bid to change attitudes (20 April 2016) Australia. This is the new campaign. There is little/no evidence that such campaigns actually reduce the incidence of DV, but by jingo $30million sure will help some lucky pro-feminist PR/marketing company. And here Mary Barry, CEO of feminist advocacy group ‘Our Watch’ barracks on the irresponsible people feeding the feminist juggernaut with ever-more $$$

Family Violence royal commission proposes policing, social services, courts overhaul (31 March 2016) Australia. Commissioner Neave admits we don’t really know how much is being spent on combatting family violence, only that millions, maybe billions, more needs to be spent. Even if it requires a special tax levy.

Letter to Malcolm Turnbull: domestic violence must be a budget priority (16 March 2016) More sir!

Shane Warne Foundation not alone in charity spending ambiguity (15 March 2016) Australia. More and better scrutiny of not-for-profits? Bring it on – and let’s start with feminist organisations.

To see just how out-of-control the DVI can get, please read ‘Spain gender laws: A country against men‘ (18 February 2016)

Australian of the Year David Morrison’s $15,000 speaking fee (4 February 2016) Elizabeth Broderick $10k/gig and Rosie Batty a bargain at only $5k. Oh and now it transpires that he’s getting $200,000 for 25 days work. Hands up who thinks the same sorts of generous arrangements would be uncovered if anyone was brave enough to delve into the finances of high-profile SJW women?

Rosie Batty’s legacy: more women leaving abusive relationships (24 January 2016) Please Sir! May I have more (money)? More calls from women (based on statistics generated by groups with a pecuniary interest, and which are unlikely to ever be verified/audited) does not necessarily equal lowering the incidence of domestic violence at all, let alone doing so in a cost-effective manner.

Thanks for your words about respecting women, Mr Turnbull. Now show us your deeds (7 January 2016) Australia

“I’m not discounting Turnbull’s commitment of $100m for domestic violence services. It is a good start” Except of course this commitment was hardly a “start”, more like the latest big ladle of mash in a very large trough. Note the author is already using the DV Connect call figures as leverage to argue for more funding.

Influx of calls to domestic violence helplines this year (6 January 2016) And of course the veracity of DV Connect’s record-keeping will be subject to careful scrutiny.

How feminists and a Police Commissioner’s Office conspired against male victims of domestic violence on Twitter (5 January 2016) UK

Smoke, Mirrors And Violence Against Women (5 January 2016) Australia

Vera Baird facing probe after awarding more than £500,000 of taxpayers’ money to the charity she runs with force police chief (26 December 2015) UK

Why I’m backing QLD Labor Premier on male victims | Talk About Men (25 October 2015)

Domestic violence initiatives to receive $41 million funding package from Federal Government, Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull to go hard against domestic violence, and Domestic violence experts welcome $100m boost, but say more is needed  (24 September 2015) That’s a lot of happy feminist snouts in a very large trough of public funds, whilst female perpetrators and their victims continue to be ignored.

Former Premier Anna calls on men to report mates guilty of domestic violence (15 September 2015) Domestic violence unabated? It’s nothing to do with the strategies being utilised and the underlying philosophy (i.e. feminism/Duluth Model), nope it’s because a) more government funding needed and/or b) men aren’t doing enough. Priceless!

Vernon Beck – How the Domestic Violence Industry Destroys Families (19 July 2015) Canadian video

Anti-Islam group deregistered for masquerading as domestic violence group (2 July 2015)

Rosie Batty – The Opposite Case (28 June 2015)

A welcome response from government to domestic violence crisis (5 June 2015) Since when does handing millions more to the same groups, running the same programs, whilst not reducing the problem one iota, constitute governments “lifting their game“?

How £210,868 (88.6%) of the 2013/14 income of Engender, a radical feminist campaign organisation, was paid by Scottish taxpayers (27 May 2015)

Anti-violence funding ‘lacks transparency and cohesion’ (16 May 2015)

Budget 2015: ‘Government failed domestic violence test’ (13 May 2015) A ‘fail’, yet another $17 million goes into the pot. Oh, and just a few days later (17 May 2015) here is another $4 million

This article exemplifies the ‘hurry up and spend more’ tone of most DV-related coverage in the mainstream media

$17M boost for domestic and family violence support (1 April 2015) Queensland Minister fails to identify the nine organisations that will get the $$$

Three Accused of Stealing Funds from Domestic Violence Shelter (31 March 2015) Expect to see more stories like this

Coalition reverses Labor’s funding cuts on homelessness with $230 million commitment prioritising victims of domestic violence (23 March 2015)

National $30 million campaign to tackle domestic violence (5 March 2015) Open wide, here comes lots more public funding for “awareness”

Baird promises Domestic Violence Minister (6 March 2015) More costly affectatious pandering to the feminist lobby. Disregard the fact that the cost of changing letterhead paper, brochures, business cards and office signage etc, would probably be enough to maintain a refuge for male victims of domestic violence for a couple of years. How about a Minister for Skin Cancer? Minister for Stopping Motor Vehicle Accidents? (Refer this blog post)

White Ribbon CEO Libby Davies jumps the cash cow (22 February 2015)

Domestic violence funding in NSW: Rosie Batty as Australian of the Year raises profile of state ‘epidemic’ (26 January 2015)

In January 2015 the West Australian government went against the flow and bravely decided to terminate a costly failed experiment (Domestic violence court axed). Despite the fact that they made it clear the decision was not based on saving money – that it was counter-productive in terms of victim outcomes – they were castigated by feminists on the basis of being uncaring about the welfare of ‘women and their children’:

“Attorney-General Michael Mischin’s decision comes nine months after the release of details of a draft review which found that offenders dealt with in the five Perth family violence courts, which cost close to $10 million a year to operate, were 2.4 times more likely to go on to commit further acts of violence than matched offenders in the mainstream system.”

And yet despite the WA decision, just a week later either the same, or a very similar, system was proposed for Queensland.

In reading this article one recognises certain parallels between ‘rape culture’ and the ‘epidemic of domestic violence’, and the two-legged remoras that attach themselves to each: ‘The Hunting Ground’: Reaping Profit from Rape Hysteria (26 March 2015)

A brilliant funding strategy” – How and why feminists took over the domestic violence movement Interviews with Erin Pizzey, Senator Anne Cools, Warren Farrell and others (Youtube video)

How Much Taxpayer Money is Enough for Domestic Violence Programs? (20 April 2009) USA

Finally, this series of email exchanges is really quite eye-opening about the theoretical basis for the way in which feminist domestic violence agencies conduct themselves. See NCFM South African Member Jason Dale, a must read email exchange about the Duluth model of domestic violence (23 March 2015)

dvfordummies

Elsewhere in this blog you might be interested in:

Going Batty: The making of a champion of the Domestic Violence Industry

Two awareness campaigns. Only one can be criticised. Cowed by feminism?

Australian feminist attacks integrity of advocacy group for male victims of domestic violence

Australian taxpayer-funded organisations that do little/nothing for men (other than demonising them)

Australian Government cuts back funding to advocacy groups, except feminist ones

NSW feminist groups seek to roll back reform of domestic violence shelters

White Ribbon Campaign to men: Stand up! Speak up! Shut up!

I wanted to draw your attention to a disturbing development involving the Australian arm of the White Ribbon Campaign (‘WRC’). Before proceeding, I should clarify that this particular organisation is separate and fundamentally different from the White Ribbon Campaign led by Ms. Erin Pizzey. The distinction between the two groups is discussed in this other post.

In summary, Erin’s organisation recognises and advocates for victims of both genders. It believes that the root cause of domestic violence lies in generational family violence, and that the patriarchy is an ideological concept devoid of value or meaning within the context of the debate regarding domestic violence.

As is the practice with many feminist organisations, WRC suppresses useful and potentially constructive debate and actively censors dissenting views. A very clear example of this occurred in February 2015 involving one of WRC’s ‘ambassadors’, a fellow by the name of Tanveer Ahmed.

The role of ambassadors within the Australian arm of the White Ribbon Campaign is described as follows:

“White Ribbon Ambassadors are men who recognise the importance of men taking responsibility and playing a leadership role in preventing men’s violence against women.

White Ribbon Ambassadors are formal representatives of White Ribbon Australia who have the knowledge, skills, attributes and determination to influence Australian men to critically evaluate their attitudes and behaviours toward women.” (Source)

Tanveer did just that. He showed leadership by writing an article about domestic violence that presented a perspective that included an acknowledgment of female perpetrators of violence, as well as a discussion of certain factors underpinning violent behaviour by both men and women.

For feminists this was like a red rag to a bull. They incorrectly interpreted “factors underpinning perpetration” as meaning “excuses for men to commit violence against women”. And as for his claims that significant numbers of women are also committing violence, well, every feminist knows that’s not true.

I should also point out that the sorts of ideas Tanveer shared in his article have been proposed by others and are hardly new or revolutionary. This fact sheet from SAVE, for example, also identifies various factors as being potential precursors of partner violence (refer Fact #5).

Here are some of the key items that have appeared in the media thus far:

Men forgotten in violence debate‘ by Tanveer Ahmed (9 February 2015)

Feminism in crisis as male supporter expresses view of his own (9 February 2015)

White Ribbon Ambassador Tanveer Ahmed’s dangerous message on domestic violence by Clementine Ford (10 February 2015)

White Ribbon Ambassador Tanveer Ahmed recommitting rather than resigning (11 February 2015)

Look at how the feminists turned on Tanveer by perusing his Twitter stream around 9/10/11 February 2015. See the brickbats hurled at him by high-profile feminists like Jane Caro and Elizabeth Broderick, as well as countless faceless SJW, their mouths frothing with spittle. It’s ironic how online bullying morphs from patriarchal scourge to sacred duty when someone dares to question the holy grail of feminism.

In a lengthy statement issued by WRC on 10 February 2015 it was noted that “Dr. Ahmed has agreed to participate in the Ambassador recommitment process”. (Source) Shades of totalitarianism … quite chilling really.

Yet despite the issuing of this statement an angry feminist horde continued to bay for Tanveer’s blood across the social media. See, for example, the WRC Facebook page (extract below) and Twitter stream. Perhaps somewhat surprising, most of the comments in the Facebook page were posted by women. Surprising only in that WRC is ostensibly an organisation for men. I guess the male supporters were well and truly cowed, just how their feminist masters wish them to be.

wrc1

Australian ‘White Knight’ politician Tim Watts, now teetering on the cusp of becoming a fully-fledged ‘Mangina’, stood up in federal parliament to demand that Dr Ahmed stand down from his role with WRC. A video of Tim’s speech is provided in his Facebook page (see 11 February), with further righteous fury evident in Tim’s Tweets.

The feminist’s message is crystal clear: “Men, we want you nice and visible up the front but don’t you dare say anything that isn’t 100% in accord with the feminist narrative or we will turn on you in a flash.”

The WRC is not an organisation that is interested in accurately describing the nature of domestic violence, in objectively teasing it apart into its component pieces, and in considering the widest possible range of solutions. This is an organisation that places a higher priority on maintaining the ‘integrity’ of the feminist narrative, and in pursuing both individual and collective self-interest.

Thus WRC portrays a picture of DV that conforms to their biased viewpoint, and that only acknowledges those causes and those solutions that fit neatly into the framework that they themselves have fashioned.

The thing is, we have already thrown many years and many million of dollars at that approach, only to have the self-same feminists come back to the public-funding trough claiming that the problem is getting worse and that we are now facing an “epidemic” of domestic violence. “Oh, but if only we had more funding we could keep the women and children safe“.

The ideologues at WRC and elsewhere in the femosphere now chanting ‘cast him out’ are nothing less than blinkered gender fascists. How any right-thinking adult could continue to support this group simply beggars belief.

The sacking of Tanveer from his role at The Australian newspaper and his removal from the role of ambassador with WRC demonstrate further escalation in the process of feminist retribution. The only question is whether the ad hominem attacks will continue in order to drive home the message to not only Tanveer, but others, to avoid criticism of all things feminist.

Rightly or wrongly I see some parallels with the case of recently-released Al Jazeera journalist Peter Greste. I think I can state with confidence though, that any irony will be lost on SJW who pledged support for one, only to subsequently attack the other.

greste1

Tanveer’s next best step would be to accept a role as an ambassador for Erin Pizzey’s group, securing a far more inclusive outlet for his passion, as well as according him the opportunity to offer a one-fingered wave to his misguided former colleagues-in-arms.

Postscript 27 April 2015: Dr Ahmed to speak at USA DV symposium 5-7 June 2015

tahmed

See also:

Reddit mensrights discussion thread on this blog post (12 February 2015)

Say goodbye to the burly blue-collar face of unions: they’re now feminist (4 June 2015)

Lynched by the feminist mob-ette (14 March 2015)

White Ribbon Australia’s ethical dilemma (19 February 2015)

‘Disempowered’ men still lead on economic power (13 February 2015)

White Ribbon Australia ambassador challenges the sisterhood – is slated for re-education camp (15 February 2015)

Columnist Tanveer Ahmed sacked by the Australian over new plagiarism allegation (16 February 2015)

White Ribbon’s got some explaining to do (17 February 2015) As does the author of this article … so many obvious misrepresentations

Men’s rights activism, White Ribbon Campaign and Liberal Feminism (9 February 2015)

Elsewhere in this blog see:

Beware the ire of an angry feminist
So what exactly is the ‘Domestic Violence Industry’?

pplhaverights

#HeForShe: Men pressed into service with nary a hint of ‘quid pro quo’

The last few years have seen a surge of social programs calling on men to step up to the line to perform some pledge or action for the womenfolk. These have been launched by government agencies, pro-feminist not-for-profits and various social media personalities. The foci of these demands for action have related mainly to sexual assault, domestic violence, and employment opportunity.

The #HeForShe hashtag/movement/thing was a reasonably high-profile example of such a campaign from the second half of 2014. The links below provide a small sampling of some of the other campaigns that have been and/or are now taking place:

One Billion Rising, A Call to Men#YouOKSisWhite Ribbon campaignPolished Man, Red my Lips, Beards Against Abuse, Walk a mile in her ShoesWhat Men Can Do, Men Stopping Violence, and #LeanInTogether

walkamileMale Champions of Change (also discussed herehere and here) is a home-grown campaign which has now spawned a ‘Female Champions of Change‘ program. And no, the latter campaign was not intended to provide a corresponding support network to champion the welfare of men. Beyond Australia there is a similar program known as Men Advocating Real Change (MARC), mentioned in this article.

Most of these campaigns have been packaged on the basis of selling a message to the broader community that feminists want to be inclusive and work with men to address shared issues of concern. Perhaps feminists realise they now have a serious image problem, having been stung into action by developments like the #WomenAgainstFeminism movement. The problem though is that beneath the shiny wrapping paper, the nature of the various campaigns runs contrary to any notions of equality, mutual respect or inclusiveness.

Firstly these campaigns all seem to be promoted on the basis of overstating men’s responsibility for both causing, and solving, each particular issue. At the same time they underplay or ignore the accountability of women in contributing to the problem, as well as their own responsibility in relation to undertaking any necessary remedial action.

There seems to be a fundamental hypocrisy associated with a movement that claims that women are strong and equal, yet continually demands that men step up to address women’s apparently helplessness in the face of real or imagined adversity.

Secondly, it is telling that no similar movements have been proposed or created by women to support men. In fact, there is no sense of reciprocity whatsoever. Nor is there generally even any acknowledgement that men might need or deserve similar recognition or support.

It is, in short, very much a one-way street. Given the many areas of relative disadvantage for men and boys this seems grossly inequitable. The underlying factor here is a culture of gynocentrism, explained here, here and here.

Thirdly, and in what must be a soul-destroying experience for the ‘white knights‘ who flutter around these campaigns like moths to a flame, many feminists resent men who openly support these campaigns. Do read this criticism, by a feminist journalist, of an admittedly  ludicrous initiative by male staff of the Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade.

And thus whilst we have one group of feminists demanding that men ‘help’ women, other feminists berate them for interfering in women’s issues and/or for seeking thanks/congratulations for being good. This is apparent, for example, in this Facebook post about a recent campaign known as ‘Red my Lips’ … peruse the bitter and angry comments by feminists and other ‘white knights’ directed at men behind the campaign – and men generally.

Why haven’t the men of Hollywood spoken up? (11 October 2017)

We Need Fraternity Men to Do a Lot More Than ‘Walk a Mile in Her Shoes’ (4 June 2017)

It’s not enough for men to turn up. They have to do the work, by Clementine Ford (13 March 2017)

Men can stop sex-trafficking (20 January 2017)

Why do so few men turn up to hear women speak? (10 March 2016) Australia. And of course no reciprocal expectation on women to attend events addressing male issues (unless to pull fire alarms and disrupt proceedings). See also my related blog post here.

She for He – Part 1 – Introduction (9 March 2016) Video by Canadian Association for Equality

Most disturbing of all are those instances where men are called upon to aid and abet the indoctrination of boys in feminist doctrine as discussed at ‘We must stop indoctrinating boys in feminist ideology‘ (20 July 2015)

Consider next the example of the uproar over University of Tasmania’s ‘women’s officer’ (8 April 2015) Isn’t this also #HeForShe? Why aren’t the women cheering this fellow? Here’s how this story ended – yeah feminism! Further discussion and readers comments here and here

If men owe women chivalry, what do women owe men? (30 November 2015)

NCFM Member Man Up asks Big Brothers Big Sisters of San Diego why they don’t ask women to women up? (25 October 2015)

The 30% Club is coming to Australia, but ‘men speaking for women’ may miss the point (9 March 2015)

Catering to men’s rights is not the point of feminism (15 October 2014) Now that’s telling us! Silly me, I always though feminist was about gender equality

Oh and this is rich. Actress Rose McGowan castigates gay men (“as misogynistic as straight men, or more so“) for not doing more to advance women’s rights in the middle East. More here

We have just seen Julien Blanc tossed out of Australia, a fellow that apparently makes a living running seminars on how to pick up women. I don’t support him or the whole PUA thing, but yet again I can’t help noticing that men were called upon to deal with him.

Still in Australia, ex-Governor-General Dame Quentin Bryce headed a Task Force on Family and Domestic Violence. Submissions to the Inquiry had just closed at the time this article appeared in the pro-feminist Guardian newspaper. It seems that those people who prepared submissions need not have bothered, as Quentin already knew that men were the problem and that the “the key drivers of change should be men and police“. That’s right ladies, no need to lift a finger, off you go and get yourselves a nice cup of tea whilst the menfolk cop all the blame plus the job of making things right.

Michelle Obama urges men at women’s summit to ‘be better’ (14 June 2016) Hmm, I wonder how she would feel if someone got up on a stage and urged black people to ‘be better’? But wait, don’t the klan do that already?

Ooh this is a bit funny naughty – feminists might go blind if they read this

The three reasons I don’t support feminist equality campaigns (13 December 2015)

Why the #YouOKSis “White Feather Campaign” failed … badly (11 December 2014)

White House calls on men to ‘step up’ in sexual assault prevention (19 September 2014) also here

Men have a special privilege of having to help women, I think we should check it (14 February 2015) Article and linked reddit discussion thread

Stella McCartney’s right: Women can use their ‘weakness’ as a form of strength (1 October 2014)

Finally, some blinding irony with the movement called ‘Men Speak Out‘  who “aim to engage men in the process of ending FGM and, on a larger scale, to end violence against women and promote gender equality through a human rights’ approach“. Bearing in mind, of course, the negligible level of interest/activity by feminists in ending the practice of involuntary male circumcision.

wendyT

Specifically on Emma Watson and #HeForShe

Fans rush to Emma Watson’s defence after she’s branded a ‘hypocrite’ and a bad example of feminism for braless magazine cover (3 March 2017) Hypocrisy

Would any women here be interested in a ‘She for He’ campaign? Reddit discussion thread with further discussion here

The Reality of #GiveYourMoneyToWomen (31 May 2015)

Seven things Tony Abbott should start fixing now that he has joined HeforShe (4 March 2015)

Youtube video #1 concerning Emma Watson’s speech (23 September 2014)

Youtube video #2 concerning Emma Watson’s speech (23 September 2014)

Youtube video #3 concerning Emma Watson’s speech (23 September 2014) See feminist reaction in comments section

The five little words that betrayed Emma Watson, by Ally Fogg (23 September 2014)

Janet Bloomfield talks about #HeForShe (23 September 2014) YouTube video

Sorry, Privileged White Ladies, but Emma Watson isn’t a ‘Game Changer’ for Feminism (24 September 2014)

Resurgence of feminists soliciting for male allies (25 September 2014) Reddit mensrights discussion thread

Emma Watson leads the retreat for UN feminism (25 September 2014)

The UN’s risible #HeForShe campaign: Pointless self-flagellation for sex-starved beta males (25 September 2014)

Sorry, Emma Watson, but HeForShe is rotten for men (26 September 2014)

Four reasons I won’t be one of the men signing Emma Watson’s #HeForShe pledge (26 September 2014)

Stefan Molyneux on Youtube about Emma’s speech (29 September 2014)

Emma Watson and the future of feminism (6 October 2014)

#HeForShe was nicely summed up by ‘Mean0Dean0’ in a reddit discussion thread on the matter:

The very concept of “He For She” makes women look like helpless children. This isn’t even “She for She,” implying sisterhood and communal responsibility. This isn’t even “We For She,” which is one-sided and focused on a minority of victims of violence and social problems, but at least community-minded. “He For She” blatantly states that men have all the power (even when they don’t) and that women need men to do their work for them (even when THEY don’t).

It’s regressive and gender-traditionalist and feminist all in one, simultaneously telling women that they can be free to be doctors or lawyers or strippers on poles, so long as big strong men open up all the big heavy doors for them. It’s patronizing to women and insulting to men, and if a man had come up with the hashtag he would have been called out as a patriarchalist traditionalist chauvinist pig. “Let’s help out those less fortunate little ladies, eh guys? Guys???”

Emma Watson – classic hypocrisy (September 2014)

sheforhe heforshe

 

 

 

 

 

Elsewhere in this blog you might also be interested in:

Women are held accountable for … (say hello to the Teflon Gender)
‘Bristly Woman’ campaign launch
Good manners versus chivalry
I thought women were meant to be more empathetic?

Differing public response to partner violence depending on gender of victim

In a segment on the ‘Sunrise’ morning TV show there appeared a video where actors simulated a display of partner harassment/violence in a public space. In the first scenario the man was the aggressor, and in the second scenario they reversed the roles. The differing reaction by members of the public was profound. The same clip has been circulating on the internet for some time now and has been the subject of much discussion in fora such as Reddit Mens Rights (see link below).

I was interested to see how the topic was dealt with on Sunrise for a couple of reasons. Firstly in promotional clips they seem to suggest that the story was about whether members of the public should intervene in instances of partner violence – rather than about the different reaction to having a male as aggressor versus female as aggressor.

Secondly, I was interested because one of those presenting the story was Andrew O’Keefe who is heavily involved in the ‘White Ribbon Campaign’ in Australia. The issue here is that the ‘White Ribbon Campaign’ is complicit in injecting into the public’s consciousness the notion that ‘domestic violence = men’s violence towards women’. In so doing the ‘Campaign’ and other domestic violence advocacy groups like it, divert attention from the other facets of domestic violence (i.e. M+M, F+F, and female on male violence).

It was indeed ironic then that Andrew tut-tutted the contrasting public reaction to female on male violence shown in the video, given that could be viewed as an outcome of the message broadcast by the White Ribbon Campaign and many pro-feminist organisations like it.

The unfortunate fact is that the average member of the public simply does not now recognise a woman’s aggression towards a male as being domestic violence, or that women’s aggression generally is of any particular social significance.

Jeremy Kyle slams audience for LAUGHING at male domestic violence victim who threw himself off a balcony (12 May 2015)

Youtube has apparently removed at least one video showing women abusing men (after it hit 6,000,000 views), but has left online videos showing men abusing women – details in this reddit discussion thread (30 October 2014)

Here is a good blog post about the video by Ally Fogg

An article in the The Independent (27 May 2014) and related Reddit discussion thread

An article about the same video in The Daily Mail

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gbPmdePpfG0 and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LlFAd4YdQks (A second/separate video showing public reaction to women abusing men)

In this hidden camera experiment a women is seen spiking her date’s drink – see how bystanders react. And yes, drink-spiking by women occurs quite often in real life – here is just the latest incident to appear in the media.

In this hidden camera experiment first a woman, and then a man, take money from a sleeping homeless guy. See the differing reaction by members of the public.

Another hidden camera experiment – Many people come to the aid of a women being abused, but yet again no-one comes to the aid of a male being subjected to abuse by a woman

A feminist justifying the differing public response to M/F and F/M violence and a related reddit discussion

This discussion thread and linked video isn’t about partner violence, but it does show how many members of the public will paint a man as the aggressor even when a woman initiates violence and continues despite efforts to reason with her.

This paper contains many links to further sources proving examples of male victims of domestic abuse not being taken seriously.

Also not about partner violence but still relevant – this video shows a female student assaulting a male student while a female teacher watches on but fails to control the situation.

Why didn’t I stop to help a woman in need? (5 August 2014)

Reaction to women abusing men in public (26 March 2008) Video

But maybe public reaction will be different in the case of sexual harassment. Hmm, maybe not

See also:

I abused a man in public and no one cared (11 October 2017) with Reddit discussion thread here

Bystanders often don’t intervene in sexual harassment – but should they? (21 February 2017) Although artfully camouflaged, the gender bias runs deep in this article. It ignores violence against men, ignores violence by women, and suggests that women more likely to intervene to stop violence.

VIDEO: Do our beliefs about domestic violence match the facts? (12 January 2017)

Dash Cam captures the moment a ‘disgruntled’ wife rams her husband’s van (4 January 2017) Australia

An Open Letter To Eddie McGuire & TripleM (13 March 2016) Australia

Gang of ‘vigilantes battered a man to death with a hammer after they saw him having an argument with his girlfriend in the street’ (4 March 2016) UK

It’s not clear whether this incident at a US school was partner violence or not, but I have included it here as the media coverage and school commentary certainly display a gender-based double standard (18 February 2016)

No more slapping (15 February 2016) Video

Would YOU intervene if you saw a woman slap her boyfriend? Shocking video shows strangers ignoring domestic violence in the street – but they rush to help a female victim (10 November 2015)

Anti-bullying video carried empowering message (29 October 2015) But no mention of the corresponding reaction when a boy was bullied. Why not? Well perhaps because it was produced by the same guy who did the infamous street harassment of a woman in New York video.

Feminist Student repeatedly assaults boy until he responds (16 June 2015)

Taraji P. Henson Slaps the Hell Out of SNL‘s Taran Killam in New Promo (9 April 2015)

Physically Abused Boyfriend Hits Girlfriend Back In Public Experiment! (6 April 2015) Another hidden-camera video

The ‘Women are Wonderful’ effect (Wikipedia entry) and this video by Christina Hoff Sommers (30 March 2015)

Reality TV actress slaps male contestant. White knights in studio audience beat male contestant when he slaps her back (12 February 2013) Youtube video

An article about gynocentrism: This paper concerns the mindset that underpins the widespread failure to recognise men as being worthy of assistance or positive intervention in situations like domestic violence. This concept is further explored here.

 Elsewhere in this blog you might be interested in reading:

But when a woman hits a man it’s different
How men are portrayed … Haw Haw Haw! The jokes on us
On recognising and supporting male victims of domestic violence

‘Sunrise’ TV show offers sop to feminists

Yet another case of two steps forward and one step back. In two earlier posts in this blog I described how members of the ‘Sunrise’ TV show purposefully stood their ground against strident feminist criticism. I had hoped that they would keep the positive momentum going with some segments about the excesses and mistruths of the contemporary feminist movement. Unfortunately that was not to be the case. Well, at least not yet. (Postscript: Pleased to see ‘Sunrise’ step up with this interview with MRA Paul Elam on 5 July 2014 … kudos to ‘Sunrise’)

I just watched a segment on ‘Sunrise‘ – an interview involving Michael Kaufman of the ‘White Ribbon Campaign‘ and Sunrise’s resident ‘White Knight‘, Andrew O’Keefe . The segment came across as something of an attempt by ‘Sunrise’ to win back some street-cred with pro-feminist viewers. It’s sad that they feel the need to curry favour with a movement represented by thisthis and this.

The ‘White Ribbon Campaign‘ is a pro-feminist organisation whose goal is to stop violence by men towards women. They ignore violence by women, and for the most part they ignore violence by men towards other men. They do acknowledge problems that disproportionately affect men like suicide and homelessness, but claim that these are a reflection of the pressures of gender stereotypes imposed on boys and men (i.e. be a man!). The solution, they say, is for men to be comfortable showing what are seen as feminine attributes – and then they would not have to hurt women. The ‘White Ribbon’ crowd thus conveniently choose to ignore more potent forces such as the increasingly toxic environment in schools and universities for male students, the pervasive anti-male bias in the media, etc etc.

By all means please do address the problem of violence – violence by people of all genders. And by all means address the imposition of negative gender stereotypes – again, by people of all genders. But by focussing entirely on violence by men towards women, the White Ribbon Campaign reinforces the prevailing stereotype of men as brutes and women as victims. That being the case, they are as much part of the problem as they are part of the solution.

One of the outcomes of this telescopic view of ‘domestic violence = mens violence towards women’ is the trivialising of the other dimensions of intimate partner violence (i.e. womens violence towards men, male on male violence, and female on female violence). This bias is a pervasive influence across society, and is discussed and demonstrated in another blog post which includes links to videos showing public reaction to male and female actors playing out different scenarios of partner violence.

The concerns of others regarding the White Ribbon Campaign can be ascertained by googling on the words ‘White Ribbon Campaign criticism’ (some examples herehereherehere, here and here). 

 

On gender traitors, white knights and manginas

As I discussed in another post within this blog, feminists often display a generous measure of spitefulness and intolerance towards those who don’t share their jaundiced view of the world. The degree of loathing demonstrated seems to depend in part on where people rank in the following list (with one being most loathed):

  1. Female men’s rights activists
  2. Male men’s rights activists
  3. Female celebrities who openly refuse to be labelled as feminists (example: Salma Hayek)
  4. Other women who openly refuse to be labelled as feminists (see this post and here)
  5. Men who claim to be feminists (example)
  6. Everyone else not in their own particular clique

I don’t recall having seen the term ‘gender traitor’ used within a men’s rights web site or forum. Nevertheless, when I googled that term, for some reason I half expected to bring up a list of sites towards the harsher fringes of the so-called ‘Manosphere’. Perhaps this is a hang-over from all those long years of gynocentric brain-washing that I’ve endured.

No, what I found instead was sites where the term ‘gender traitor’ was used by feminist women … sites such as these:

http://www.skepticink.com/skepticallyleft/2012/11/01/gender-traitor-solidarity
http://www.democraticunderground.com/111411793

Interestingly also, when I review the search terms that people use to find my blog, I’ve noted several examples like “Erin Pizzey traitor” or “Karen Straughan traitor” (these being well-known men’s rights activists). And just recently an Australian journalist, Corrine Barraclough, was accused of being a traitor after calling for a gender-neutral approach to domestic violence.

This use of ‘gender traitor’ and other similar terms conflicts with this statement by a feminist writer: “Interesting that feminists do not have a derogatory word for women who are not active in their movement. Maybe men could just respect each other’s opinions and win minds with logic.”

Whilst browsing social media and the WWW, two terms that one may also encounter are ‘White Knight’ and ‘Mangina’. These terms tend, however, to be used with more of a sense of bemusement or mild disgust, rather than white hot anger. It is important to note also, that neither term are used in a blanket sense, i.e. to refer to all men who don’t support the men’s rights agenda. And in fact, many within the men’s rights movement reject the use of the term ‘mangina’ entirely, seeing it as inherently misogynistic.

White Knights are mainly driven by a sense of chivalry, impulsively responding to the impromptu cultural cue of a ‘damsel in distress’. Often white knights are largely ignorant of the nature of both feminism and the men’s rights movement. The historical derivation of the concept of a White Knight is discussed in this blog post.

Here is a recent example of ‘White Knight’ behaviour. Whilst I respect Ian Chappell as a person, his suggestion that cricketer Chris Gayle be banned from playing is an absurdly ‘over-the-top’ response to a relatively benign misdemeanour.

purse_poochWhereas ‘white knights’ can be ingenues in the context of the gender debate, manginas are active and informed. Manginas often consider themselves to be feminists. They are frequently wilfuly persistent in seeking out opportunities to compromise the efforts of those wishing to advance particular objectives of the men’s rights movement and/or counter aspects of feminist ideology.

This is the way one fellow explained the difference between the two:

“A white knight is a man who will mindlessly defend a woman even when she is in the wrong, particularly if he does it out a misguided hope of impressing women with his honor. White knights are not necessarily feminists; they may be traditionalists as well. Women, not just feminists, will manipulate white knights into attacking other men for their own ends (or even just amusement).

A mangina is a man who has embraced the misandry of radical feminism and uses it to denigrate and smear other men in a pathetic attempt to make himself look better by comparison or to specifically curry the favor of feminist women.

A white knight will attack you physically, a mangina will just accuse you of being an exemplar of toxic masculinity. A white knight may be a very masculine man, a mangina never is.” (Source)

white_knight

See also:

ewww

Male feminist, Jason Dion Bews, assaults female reporter then women cover his escape into the crowd (24 January 2017) Canada. Will this practice, feminists employing male muscle to fight their fights, become more common? If they get caught, meh, disavow & blame toxic masculinity!

The gendered nature of trolling, by Cory Zanoni (7 October 2016) An example of a mangina in action, employed by a web site widely-recognised for the degree of gender bias which it practices (example).

Things we could celebrate on an International Men’s Day, by Ben McLeay (7 March 2016) Another example of the handiwork of a mangina.

A more aggressive version of a ‘White Knight’ (20 January 2016) UK

Men Cannot Be Feminists, So Let’s Talk About Diversity Instead (10 December 2015) Australia

Beware the Self-Proclaimed Male Feminist (1 December 2015)

Philip Davies: ‘politically correct males pander to militant feminists’ (20 November 2015) UK

Gender identity triangle (3 June 2015) Youtube video

Masculinity, Positive Masculinity, and the White Knight as a Perversion of Masculinity (9 May 2015)

TV ad #4 Gender Traitor? Woman Hater? What kind of women think so? Divorce Attorney Marilyn York  (29 April 2015)

On White Knight syndrome (undated) India

7 reasons why dating feminist men truly sucks by Janet Bloomfield (14 November 2014)

The #GamerGate White Knight syndrome (18 October 2014)

Wanna be a Male Feminist? Okay, here’s what you have to do by Janet Bloomfield (9 August 2013)

The One Good Man‘ by Alison Tieman (16 March 2011)

White Knight Syndrome

Manginas – Betrayers of men (20 August 2008)

LibDem Mangina Richard Reeves calls for more housework to be done by men for women (8 March 2013)

The failed manhood of white knights (23 May 2012) by Paul Elam

A Youtube video on what feminism does to men

‘It’s not a contradiction for men to discriminate against other men’ (14 July 2014)

http://manhood101.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=205

http://drewspective.com/2011.11/misandry-distinguishing-lied-to-men-from-white-knights-manginas-pussy-beggars/

Feminism as a mating strategy among beta males (30 June 2014)

#DearFeministMen, there are some people who value your opinions and experiences (2 August 2014)

The Rise of the Mangina (27 November 2013)

Other related posts within this blog:

Good manners versus chivalry
What did you call me? On labelling and language in gender discourse
Nice guys, nice guys™ and the friendzone (working draft)

What did you call me? On labelling and language in gender discourse

One of the many feminist criticisms of the mens rights movement, and particularly MHRA web sites like ‘A Voice for Men’, is that they are characterised by the frequent use of descriptors of women that are offensive and sexist … terms such as sluts or whores.

Personally I have noticed that there is surprisingly little usage of such terms in MRA sites or blogs. Moreover when such terms do appear they are generally found within comments contributed by readers (some of whom are trolls), rather than in the body of posts or articles themselves. Such put-downs also almost invariably relate to feminists rather than women per se.

It was with interest then that I came across this study ‘Cursing in English on Twitter‘ (see section entitled ‘Cursing Vs Gender’ on page 8). Granted, the study wasn’t about MRA/feminist sites, but the findings are still interesting. The study found, for example, that the the use of terms ‘bitch’ ‘slut’ and ‘whore’ by women was more prevalent than the level of use by men.

This post looks at the issue of online harassment, whilst in another blog post I discuss the terms gender traitor, white knight and mangina.

Another related term that has come to be used increasingly widely is ‘cuck‘, which is  the shortened version of ‘cuckold‘. The common meaning seems to be a person (generally male) who does the bidding of another whilst not truly invested in that person’s (or groups) cause, for example a politician who supports feminist programs out of fear of castigation and/or in the hope of winning the ‘women’s vote’.

See also:

Masculinity and Misogyny in the Digital Age (2016)

‘Lord protect me from easily offended snowflake girls’ (17 October 2016) Ireland

Women most likely to use misogynistic language on Twitter, report finds (17 October 2016) with related Reddit discussion thread here

David Leyonhjelm: NSW Senator lodges complaint over journalist’s claim he is an ‘angry white male’ (15 August 2016)

Female judge stuns courtroom by telling racist thug: ‘You’re a bit of a c*** yourself’ (11 August 2016)

Are we seriously expected to take any liberal feminist seriously? (10 August 2016)

Corporate Cucks … and the language police who protect and serve them (5 August 2016)

The ‘C’ word (‘cuck’) (19 May 2016) Australia. Reddit discussion thread

“What’s mansplaining?” Senator Mitch Fifield offended by Senator Katy Gallagher’s allegation (10 February 2016) Australia. Video

Why Do Feminists And Social Justice Warriors Use So Much Profanity? (2 February 2016)

Is Kerri Sackville a slut? (18 January 2016)

Manspreading, Transgender and Shaming … How the Left Wing controls language (6 November 2015)

Mansults: the put-downs that are always levelled at straight white males (19 September 2015)

Mean Girls: Why the Only People Women Should Fear Online Are Other Women (10 August 2015)

Lena Dunham: The Expression ‘TMI’ Is Sexist (2 October 2014) USA

Ironic misandry: Why feminists pretending to hate men isn’t funny (12 August 2014)

http://m.nationalreview.com/campaign-spot/373355/you-cant-whine-your-way-better-world-jim-geraghty

http://www.avoiceformen.com/women/dr-paul-on-the-bitch-double-standard/

http://uberfeminist.blogspot.com.au/2013/05/feminists-support-rape-culture.html

more_hypocrisy

 

 

On chivalry

Upon entering the search term ‘feminist good manners’ into google one day, one of the first papers to crop up was one entitled No chivalry, thanks”.

The author of that article sought to differentiate between the notion of ‘good manners/politeness’ on the one hand and ‘chivalry’ on the other. Her position was that good manners are mostly OK, whilst ‘chivalry’ is bad. I agree with her that chivalry can be a negative factor … but not for the reason she states.

Let’s detour for a moment to visit www.thefreedictionary.com, where upon entering the term “good manners” we bring up the following related words:

  • courtesy
  • personal manner, manner – a way of acting or behaving
  • niceness, politeness – a courteous manner that respects accepted social usage
  • urbanity – polished courtesy; elegance of manner
  • graciousness – excellence of manners or social conduct
  • chivalry, politesse, gallantry – courtesy towards women
  • respectfulness, deference, respect – courteous regard for people’s feelings; “in deference to your wishes”; “out of respect for his privacy”
  • civility – formal or perfunctory politeness

The definition of the term ‘chivalry’, on the other hand, includes “The qualities idealized by knighthood, such as bravery, courtesy, honor, and gallantry toward women”, and “kindness and courteousness especially towards women or the weak”.

Back now to the ‘No chivalry, thanks‘ article where the author takes aim at two criticisms of feminism, which she describes as being:

The “cake and eat it too” complaint: “This anti-feminist argument says that women want to be independent and strong when it’s convenient for them, but they don’t want to lose the option for men to buy them dinner, open doors, and all around make them feel special. We want all the rights afforded to men, but that we also want to be treated better than men. Feminists want special, not equal, treatment, or in other words, they want their cake and to eat it too”, and

The “feminists hate manners!” complaint: “Other anti-feminists have chosen to smack-talk feminism by claiming that any stance which truly speaks out against chivlary (sic) is actually an affront to good manners.”

The author indicates that she’d “like to dismantle these complaints”, but in fact her views only serve to reinforce the validity of those complaints whilst undermining the feminist perspective generally. Her comments include:

The core of my disdain for chivalry is that it’s rooted in a gendered premise. Its very notion is that women need special assistance and wooing, which I flat out disagree with. Given this, I can say fully that I do not want or expect chivalry. In that way, the “cake and eat it too” complaint is nonsense to me. I do not want any person to look at me and treat me differently based off of (sic) my gender, even if that treatment is favourable.

(Mod: My emphasis added. LOL … I think we could readily find a plethora of exceptions to that with respect to feminist goals and achievements generally!)

“The same goes for stereotypes of all sorts–just because something is “nice” (ie Asians are so smart!) doesn’t make it any less racist. So with chivalry, just because it’s “friendly,” doesn’t make it any less sexist.”

“All in all, I simply feel that chivalry and feminism are inherently incompatible. I would never expect to be treated both equally and special. That’s an oxymoron. In fact, I’m not entirely sure that there are women who actually are advocating for both. Yes, some women want chivalry, but I would suspect they do not typically identify as feminists. To me, it seems a to be a straw man situation, as is the claim that feminists are really attacking manners. Nevertheless, it is important for us to understand the arguments used against our viewpoints, no matter how trivial.”

So in short, many feminists abhor chivalry because they perceive it as a pattern of behaviour intended to subjugate and patronise women, and as a manifestation of what they term ‘benevolent sexism‘.

Ah, but it gets confusing. In yet another of their breathtaking displays of hypocrisy, feminists strongly rely upon and encourage chivalry to achieve their goals. Look at all the calls for men to mobilise against other men in stopping domestic abuse and rape. Consider the #HeForShe campaign and many other similar campaigns. In none of these examples do feminists call for, or support, corresponding  campaign for women to support men or men’s rights.

In contrast, the core of my ambivalence in relation to chivalry is that:

  • I believe in gender equality, and chivalry cannot and should not exist where there is true equality
  • Chivalry is the fuel that drives the actions of ‘white knights’, men who make it their duty to hamper progress on raising awareness and acceptance of men’s rights issues.
  • Chivalry stands in the way of objective reasoning. Chivalry causes men to conflate the often unreasonable assertions and demands of feminists, with the welfare of women generally. I see this happening in almost every mainstream media article that permits readers to contribute comments, wherein men attack one another in the mistaken belief that any progress on achieving mens rights is not just a set-back for women, but somehow akin to spitting in their face. If only such men would make an effort to familiarise themselves with not just the specific issue under consideration, but also both the nature of feminism and of men’s rights advocacy generally.

More thoughts on good manners and chivalry

Modern dating experiences including ‘ghosting’ and ‘breadcrumbing’ leave three in four women feeling that chivalry is dead (2 August 2017) Women have been doing these things to men since whenever, now more men are giving back the same and it’s suddenly unfair

‘Good Samaritan’ bullied, beaten and called a kidnapper after helping lost child (29 June 2017)

This reader’s comment by ‘SantaOrange’ in a Reddit discussion thread addresses why chivalry is a major constraint to making progress on men’s rights (10 May 2017)

Here’s a recent newspaper item that features a prat-like whinge from a woman who would like men to leave her alone – after they perform whatever service she requires. Presumably men are meant to  magically realise that she is a feminist and is not interested in social overtures. But on the other hand they are magically meant to know that although she is a feminist, she does appreciate men helping her by performing manual labour in relation to her overweight carry-on luggage. Perhaps if she held up a sign providing all this information, then men might be more co-operative/compliant. A subsequent online discussion can be found here.

And here is an article on the subject of holding doors open (plus readers comments) in a feminist blog.

Here is an article entitled ‘He also pays for his own dinners‘ that , in a patronising tone, sniffs at the notion of men displaying chivalry and their motivations for doing so. The best thing about the article was this readers comment:

“The most generous and helpful thing a man can do for a woman on an individual level is to hold her accountable – no letting her off because she’s female.

If traditional expressions of chivalry are important to women, let women do them. My girlfriend brought me flowers last night because I had a bad day. Fine. I’ll cook her dinner sometime.

Listen men, chivalry backfires. If you pay for the first date you’re losing a valuable opportunity to screen out the women who will see you as nothing but an ATM machine. And there’s no such thing as paying for a first date anyway. When you pay for a first date, you’re making it cheaper for her to go on another date with somebody else. You’re just subsidizing her search for the perfect man. Do yourself a favour and make women chip in for their quest for Mr. Right.

And men, while we’re on the subject of chivalry, remember you’re not a human punching bag. Make it very clear at the beginning of the relationship: if she ever hits you, screams at you, or calls you names, or tries to humiliate you in front of your friends, or destroys any of your property on purpose, or tries to use sex as a bargaining chip, that’s the end of the relationship, right then, right there. No questions asked. No looking back. Just walk away.

Don’t let your sense of chivalry turn you into a victim. You’re better than that.”

Men are weirdly concerned about trans women’s use of female bathrooms, according to new study (December 2016) How to take a good thing – men’s ingrained protective instinct towards women – and paint it as a negative.

“Men were 1.5 times more likely than women to have concerns about transgender women using women’s bathrooms.”

Man stabbed in Southbank while coming to woman’s aid (25 February 2017) Australia. It appears the female being assaulted left the scene – did you she render any assistance to her rescuer? Don’t be that guy. Timely that this incident occurred the same week as this article in The Conversation.

Dave Chappelle on how women killed chivalry (21 November 2016) Comedy video

Home Hill stabbing: British journalist Tom Jackson attacked as he went to aid of Mia Ayliffe-Chung (26 August 2016) Tom sadly later died from his injuries.

Damseling, chivalry and courtly love (part two) by Peter Wright (17 July 2016)

Belinda Brown: Women exploit men’s chivalrous instincts (12 June 2016)

Chivalry is not dead when it comes to morality (8 June 2016) We’re more likely to sacrifice a man than a woman when it comes to both saving the lives of others and in pursuing our self-interests, a team of psychology researchers has found.

Where are the stand up men? (29 May 2016) This special snowflake rant earned itself some rather forthright readers comments. Further commentary here.

The Confused Male: Do women really want what they say they want? (3 May 2016) UK

Chivalry: A learned deathwish, by Paul Elam (25 April 2016)

Would you be a Good Samaritan? Chinese kung fu student JAILED after saving woman from sexual harassment on a bus (22 April 2016) China. The woman ran away

Liz Hayes relives terrifying moment 60 Minutes crew were attacked (21 March 2016) Australia. Careful Liz, don’t let the feminists hear you admitting that – it’s kind of the opposite of their precious narrative …

“I just knew, they wouldn’t hit me … I was glad, right then, that I was a woman. I felt they wouldn’t hit me because of that, and that might mean I could slow things down a bit. I’m pretty sure if I was one of the guys I probably would have been hit as well.”

Good Samaritan Norman Olsen dies in hospital (24 February 2016) Australia

Female bouncers, sin bins should be considered as part of lockout laws, psychologist says (19 February 2016) I think female bouncers would be less likely to get punched due (in part) to chivalry, but the idea appears to contradict the feminist position on DV whereby men seen to be just as likely/more likely to hit a woman.

Chivalry and the Law: How Women Get Off, by Krista Milburn (15 February 2016) Recommended reading

Feminism, sex-differences and chivalry (7 February 2016)

Boats for women, by Mark Dent (12 January 2016)

Chivalry still a force to be reckoned with, by Miranda Devine (12 December 2015)

“The most despicable thing about the feminist movement is that it exploits male protective instincts and male virtues such as self-sacrifice for the “greater good” in order to expand female privilege. It doesn’t actually challenge these gender roles in any meaningful sense. But I agree it’s time to put an end to chivalry. The cat is out of the bag and it’s not going back in.” (Source)

Man is crushed to death by falling elevator in New York City (1 January 2016)

Video captures man’s attempt to catch woman falling 11 storeys (1 January 2016)

If men owe women chivalry, what do women owe men? (30 November 2015)

YOYO 19: One day a month, stop protecting women (30 September 2015)

The sad reality of today’s male-female dynamic. I have women I love in my life and I wish things were different. It’s sad people have to think twice before helping others (9 September 2015) Reddit discussion thread

Why don’t we have stories about women sacrificing themselves for the men they love? by Janet Bloomfield (9 July 2015)

Men must stop playing by the rules, walk away, and claim their autonomy. The gender contract is null and void. If a new social contract is to be agreed, it must be agreed by free men (18 June 2015) Reddit mensrights discussion thread

Model receives death threats after splitting bill on date (22 April 2015)

Chivalry but equality: The feminist double-standard, by Prentice Reid (21 April 2015)

What ever happened to chivalry? by Peter Wright (13 April 2015)

Opinion: Chivalry, not gender politics, dictates who pays for that first date, by Caroline Marcus (12 April 2015) Notice not one reader comment in support of this hypocritical sexist tosh

John Stuart Mill on chivalry (31 March 2015)

Chivalry could indicate hidden sexism, study finds (10 March 2015)

Chivalry isn’t dead: Why feminists still want a gentleman Reddit discussion thread and linked article (15 February 2015)

I’m a Feminist and I Still Want These 7 Gentlemanly Gestures. Do You? (20 February 2015) and related reddit mensrights discussion thread

White Ribbon Campaigns: Promoting medieval chivalry (25 November 2014)

And more recently, an article entitled ‘Equality is essential but so is chivalry‘ (Herald Sun 16 June 2014). This one very much in the all rights/no responsibility vein. It starts of bemoaning the fact that nobody stood up for a pregnant woman on a train and then goes on and on from there. The usual feminist theme of … there’s a problem, men caused it, and it’s mens responsibility to fix it … to our specifications. No readers comments were permitted – wonder why? Thank goodness that this MRA made the time to prepare a great rebuttal.

Why women need to start asking men out … because men have no balls (9 September 2014) The author of this incredibly sexist article, notable only for the caustic criticism of the 1,200+ readers comments that follow it, was Lauren Martin.

Jennifer Lawrence Nude Pics Highlight Ongoing Struggle With Chivalry (2 September 2014)

How to be a 21st Century ‘Gentleman’ (12 September 2014) I liked this reader’s comment: “Are there any classes teaching women some basic etiquette, too? Why are we just gripping on men when women need just as much a major make-over on behavior”. This theme is oft repeated – recent versions here and here, and with a rebuttal article here

Feminists and their progressive allies think that children swearing edgy and humorous – provided it’s for a ‘good’ cause (October 2014)

Why I no longer hold doors open for women (9 September 2014)

Why didn’t I stop to help a woman in need?‘ (5 August 2014) The article is fairly ordinary but there is some excellent material amongst the readers comments section.

Pantene ‘Not Sorry’ video tells women to stop apologizing so much (18 June 2014)

From “Women assault elderly man” to “Shame on men” in easy steps, by Jim Muldoon (1 March 2014)

Women are fine with sexism … as long as it benefits them (22 October 2013)

The One Good Man (16 March 2011)

Now for the background to this article you’ll need to take a look at this other blog post. In the article feminist author, Lauren Rosewarne, lashes out at those concerned about comments made by a federal parliamentarian. That politician told journalists that she wanted a male partner who was rich, well-endowed and who didn’t talk. Lauren haughtily admonishes us, today the sane amongst us dismiss such notions as laughably repressive and egregiously controlling.”

chivalrychivalry sanaya