![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
drcuriosityHere's some stuff I wrote elsewhere, that I thought might be good to have a record of to refer to later. The context of the discussion was a woman suggesting that men being violent against women was far worse than female violence against men. From someone else's response to the thread:
Yes the statistics bear out the fact that MOST violence is done by males. It is very easy for us to sit in judgement over individual men or women who have done terrible things to other family members. But society in general has to accept some culpability because high risk individuals continue to be exposed to economic and emotional stresses as well as drug and alcohol induced trauma that are beyond their ability to cope.
Now, my response:
I agree that there are some societal issues that need to be addressed, here - one can't just target and remove the "high risk" members from a society like ours, because everyone is at some degree of risk, and these things do change over time.
Males do tend to perpetrate more physical violence than females do. Certainly, having more testosterone in your system does tend to promote more aggressive responses to things, and those with more strength are more likely to use that as a method of competing with or exerting power over those who have less. Treating that as the whole story would be specious.
I feel that this is in some way a price we pay for having what some people call "Real Men". The staunch guy who'll step in to protect his mates or his girl if they're in trouble, who takes any troubles on the chin and doesn't whinge about it. The kind of guy who's more likely to go down to the shed and chop firewood to get something out of his system than cry into his beer down at the pub.
This is the kind of stereotype that a large proportion of New Zealand men have grown up with. You don't open up to anyone about your problems, or you're a wuss. You don't dob someone in - you sort out your own problems. You take the shit that's piled up on you with a "yeah, no worries mate". The worries don't go away, though - you're just expected to cope.
The thing is, not all guys work that way. Given few outlets for getting rid of feelings of stress, frustration and powerlessness in a peaceful fashion, is it any wonder that so many men lash out with their fists? In a culture where it's pretty much an accepted (and often tolerated) fact that people will get aggressive and lash out a bit if they get drunk?
If we set up such a strong archetype for our society's men to conform to, then is it any wonder that so many turn out to have feet of clay?
It's mostly here for posterity, but if you've got any commentary to go with it, by all means...
Yes the statistics bear out the fact that MOST violence is done by males. It is very easy for us to sit in judgement over individual men or women who have done terrible things to other family members. But society in general has to accept some culpability because high risk individuals continue to be exposed to economic and emotional stresses as well as drug and alcohol induced trauma that are beyond their ability to cope.
Now, my response:
I agree that there are some societal issues that need to be addressed, here - one can't just target and remove the "high risk" members from a society like ours, because everyone is at some degree of risk, and these things do change over time.
Males do tend to perpetrate more physical violence than females do. Certainly, having more testosterone in your system does tend to promote more aggressive responses to things, and those with more strength are more likely to use that as a method of competing with or exerting power over those who have less. Treating that as the whole story would be specious.
I feel that this is in some way a price we pay for having what some people call "Real Men". The staunch guy who'll step in to protect his mates or his girl if they're in trouble, who takes any troubles on the chin and doesn't whinge about it. The kind of guy who's more likely to go down to the shed and chop firewood to get something out of his system than cry into his beer down at the pub.
This is the kind of stereotype that a large proportion of New Zealand men have grown up with. You don't open up to anyone about your problems, or you're a wuss. You don't dob someone in - you sort out your own problems. You take the shit that's piled up on you with a "yeah, no worries mate". The worries don't go away, though - you're just expected to cope.
The thing is, not all guys work that way. Given few outlets for getting rid of feelings of stress, frustration and powerlessness in a peaceful fashion, is it any wonder that so many men lash out with their fists? In a culture where it's pretty much an accepted (and often tolerated) fact that people will get aggressive and lash out a bit if they get drunk?
If we set up such a strong archetype for our society's men to conform to, then is it any wonder that so many turn out to have feet of clay?
It's mostly here for posterity, but if you've got any commentary to go with it, by all means...
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2004-12-23 02:40 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-12-23 04:52 pm (UTC)"those with more strength are more likely to use that as a method of competing with or exerting power over those who have less"
I do not believe that anyone has less power than another just different power, however in saying that I also see that not everyone knows how to tap into the power that they do have, in the case of the "weak woman" if there is such a thing, it would seem that a well placed punch would put her down for the count, but what about the woman who just for example says the word "no" to said stupid but strong man, this I believe we have seen mess with the mind of said male for years, sadly for said male he has no bruises to show for it yet his inner scars may well be very deep.
We all have power of some sort and should we chose to use it we must be willing to except the responsibility for what we do with said power.
As I believe that all truth is subjective, and at least form my point of view those that leave marks on another will in time be on the other end.
I have a whole lot more to say on the matter and people as always can feel free to ask me what I think about, well anything, that is should you care what I think.
Remember all thought and advise I have is free and one day someone out there might even get something out of what I have to say.
no subject
Date: 2004-12-23 06:33 pm (UTC)I heard an interesting (though only slightly relevant) statistic the other day, I can't remember the exact figures but it went more or less like this, there are more than 3000 people on death row in America, less than 50 of them are women. Women who kill primarily (and by a fairly whopping margin) use poison.
Except
Date: 2004-12-23 08:20 pm (UTC)As a woman, I find chopping wood to be excellent for dealing with stress. I wish there were more wood.
no subject
Date: 2004-12-23 09:33 pm (UTC)As you say truth is subjective and it is also contextual. In the context of violence most women are weaker than most men. The fact that I might tell a guy he is ugly and to fuck off does not change the fact that he might then go out and rape someone - it is still his problem and there is still a victim. It also does not change a situation where, say, I get a boyfriend a few years down the road who gets pissed off 'cause I talk to another guy so he decides to knock me around. This is not changed or effected by me turning mr ugly down. Ok it might upset him and that might make him more prone to act out violently but as above this training is a problem caused by society not by me. I might have been the trigger but not the cause.
Also it is obvious that he is referring to physical power and strength not emotional or anything else.
What you say is valid just not really related or relevant to the argument being posed. Yes "must be willing to [accept] the responsibility for what we do with said power." but that does not really mean anything in this context? It does not change the fact that our society fucks with the minds of its men. It does not pose a solution - how will we teach people this? You are not actually answering the quote that I can discern... do correct me if I have missed your point?
Re: Except
Date: 2004-12-23 09:40 pm (UTC)Stress release is important but I think that the idea that one should only physically 'excise' your feelings rather than expressing them or talking or even thinking about them is a dangerous one. The silent type often bottle in their emotions rather than express them or even acknowledge them and thus it all comes out at the wrong moment and in the wrong way.
If we do not equip someone with the ability to speak can we blame them for being silent? No. But we can blame them if they choose to express themselves through violence rather than gesture. But it is still the fault of society that they have not been taught to speak. Not the best metaphor but I do think there is a point where we all have to take responsibility for the behaviour of individuals in our society especially when the statistics keep mounting.
Re: Except
Date: 2004-12-23 10:53 pm (UTC)I think allowing people to lay blame elsewhere for their personal behaviour is encouraging the behaviour by allowing excuses.
Having said that, people watch all the soap opera and the Osbornes and Big Brother and so-called reality tv, and see stuff that's edited or scripted to increase the drama, people yelling at each other, backstabbing, ripping each other off, cheating on partners etc. Some people are addicted to this stuff, they watch things like Coro religiously. I guess being able to tell the difference between that and how real life should be is something parents are responsible for teaching their kids.
I don't think there's an easy answer, but I keep coming back to the fact that how you behave is the individual's choice, unless they have a mental illness. Mental illnesses are not the fault of society.
no subject
Date: 2004-12-23 11:21 pm (UTC)However I do have a certain ammount of sympathy for this guy:
www.craigslist.org/about/best/nyc/47785163.html
no subject
Date: 2004-12-24 04:37 am (UTC)Re: Except
Date: 2004-12-24 04:56 am (UTC)I'd agree that people should be responsible for their actions. However, there are a lot of people out there who don't seem to have the presence of mind or the level of self-knowledge necessary to step back from their situations and make the kind of decisions they ought to in order to own their problems and stop themselves from being destructive.
I don't think it's a question of blaming society per se - I was more guessing as to why so many people in our society make the mistakes they do. When it comes down to it, choices and responsibilities are an individual thing - but it's still a problem that affects more than just the individuals themselves. Could and should we be giving people better tools or information with which to make those choices?
I've found waving large sticks or bits of metal around to be good stress relief, in the past. But then, I've never had a fireplace that needed stocking.
Re: Except
I too wish there were more wood. High quality wood.
Thats all. :)
Re: Except
Date: 2004-12-26 04:19 am (UTC)Re: Except
no subject
Date: 2004-12-27 08:49 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-12-29 01:56 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-12-29 02:08 pm (UTC)First of all I was not talking about turning Mr Ulgy down.
"What you say is valid just not really related or relevant to the argument being posed."
I see it as very relevant, if I am the only one then so be it, I am looking at the big picture.
"Saying no doesn't stop someone from breaking your jaw."
Not for everyone, no.
The word on it's own has little power, however in my own life I put my foot down with a "NO" and I am no longer a victim.
no subject
Date: 2004-12-30 02:31 am (UTC)"Must manhood be defined in terms of war and football?"
Date: 2005-01-07 04:30 am (UTC)Huh? I thought you were talking about Americans...
...
I do know that anger and violence are listed as symptoms of depression. And I believe it's more likely that clinically depressed men will display those sort of symptoms...rather than symptoms like, you know, excessive crying.
I'm often disturbed by how obsessed American men are with competition. I mean, athletes are so competitive they beat up fans. And of course there's Mepham...
Re: "Must manhood be defined in terms of war and football?"
Date: 2005-01-07 01:16 pm (UTC)I hadn't heard of the Mepham case before, so I've just looked it up (this article seemed fairly in-depth). Damn. We had a case of something similar here in 2001 I think, and it made national TV news for quite a while - an incident involving some very nasty schoolboys and a broomstick.
In our case, the six students responsible were tried as adults, getting sentences of between two and two and a half years in jail, and had their names added to a public register of sexual offenders - and this when the students in question included the then head boy, deputy head boy and head sport prefect at the school. The victim was granted permanent name suppression by the courts; the offenders were named even before sentencing.
Both cases sound like the product of a broken school sporting culture. I'm glad that in ours the community was more concerned with justice than with the effect it would have on sports scholarships, but that fact that it happened at all is sickening in the extreme.
No one take this the wrong way.
Date: 2005-01-07 02:10 pm (UTC)http://squirrelhazing.squirrelsinblack.org/