What about men?

This is exactly the point, that no, it should not be about men and women. Here is a direct quote from her post:

"I launched a study last year, exploring the many different forms of victim blaming women and girls can experience. Over 700 people responded. My other recent studies have included interviewing women who have been blamed for rape and abuse, interviewing therapists and support workers who work with women who blame themselves for being abused or attacked and a complex study in which I developed and validated a new psychometric measure of victim blaming of women.
I honestly cannot express how much whataboutery I get. "

In this instance, her study was about 'exploring the many different forms of victim blaming women and girls can experience'. This study was not about men at all. But why do so many men want to make it about them?
 
Vanilla said:
This is exactly the point, that no, it should not be about men and women. Here is a direct quote from her post:

"I launched a study last year, exploring the many different forms of victim blaming women and girls can experience. Over 700 people responded. My other recent studies have included interviewing women who have been blamed for rape and abuse, interviewing therapists and support workers who work with women who blame themselves for being abused or attacked and a complex study in which I developed and validated a new psychometric measure of victim blaming of women.
I honestly cannot express how much whataboutery I get. "

In this instance, her study was about 'exploring the many different forms of victim blaming women and girls can experience'. This study was not about men at all. But why do so many men want to make it about them?
Click to expand...

I must be thick because I still don’t get it. Is she saying that she got all that whataboutery from men she knew, colleagues, male friends, family. Or did she get it from people posting on the internet using fake names??? I don’t get it because as a man, I would never think like that. And I don’t expect validation or anything of the sort. And someone asking why do men as a specie need constant validation is as sexist as men asking women why they need constant reassurance about things. This is gone ridiculous.
 
Vanilla said:
This is exactly the point, that no, it should not be about men and women. Here is a direct quote from her post:

"I launched a study last year, exploring the many different forms of victim blaming women and girls can experience. Over 700 people responded. My other recent studies have included interviewing women who have been blamed for rape and abuse, interviewing therapists and support workers who work with women who blame themselves for being abused or attacked and a complex study in which I developed and validated a new psychometric measure of victim blaming of women.
I honestly cannot express how much whataboutery I get. "

In this instance, her study was about 'exploring the many different forms of victim blaming women and girls can experience'. This study was not about men at all. But why do so many men want to make it about them?
Click to expand...

Can the same experience not occur to men and boys? Why can't we make it about human beings? Why is she excluding their experiences?
This isn't a medical professional who specialises in gynaecology which obviously is gender specific.
Maybe the men asking the questions feel they were victim blamed and that no one is interested in their experiences.

Or, from a different angle, surely one of the most powerful comparitive tools for evaluating any psychometric measure of victim blaming would be the different experiences of men, woman, boys, girls across cultures?

That's not to say it's unreasonable for someone to do a study like this, but it is reasonable to ask, if there is a pattern of these kind of studies that are just about one gender, then yes, what about the other? And that can work both ways - if someone is just writing about men, where is the balance, either in their work, or in the work of their faculty.

Maybe she should take a step back and ask herself why is she being asked this question? Is the vast majority of her published work about one gender and haven't male academics in the past been criticised for precisely such an imbalance?

I'll put the question another way that isn't a "what about men". Does she think that there is as much focus on men as women in gender studies and specialisations of this sort? Does she think it is balanced, and if it not, does she think that's an issue?
 
Vanilla said:
I actually do despair, whataboutery in practice.

Why do you need that validation? There are a lot of good guys who don't sexually harass women- well, I shouldn't have to tell you- that is what it should be, that is the norm, you don't need praise or validation for that. Why do you even need to say that? But you expect that praise, you expect every outcry of condemnation to be prefaced by- but not all guys are like that!

Ok, so, at the risk of great irony, what about the men?

There has been an increase in gang related crime- but not all men are involved in gangs, or in crime- aren't they great.

There has been an increase in domestic violence- but not all of it ( even if it is the majority) is perpetrated by men. A significant minority of domestic violence is perpetrated by women. And not all men even attack their wives, aren't they great.

Men are great, men are great, men are great. There, is that enough, or should we talk more about men?
Click to expand...

Again, what men do you know that discuss a specific rape or sexual harassment case saying how horrible it is but then add, ‘but we are not all like that’.... seriously how many times have you heard that?
 
Sunny said:
Again, what men do you know that discuss a specific rape or sexual harassment case saying how horrible it is but then add, ‘but we are not all like that’.... seriously how many times have you heard that?
Click to expand...

Actually the usual thing to say is "they should string the <bleep> up" or "they should cut the guys <bleep> off". I'm sure many a cop has used the line, "we're going to get the <bleep> who did this." It's implicit by using that phrase... what you are really trying to convey is... we're not all like that.
 
Matt should have come to me for his speech that day. "What I want to say is, these sort of actions have no place in Hollywood. I say this to other men in Hollywood, we have a duty here and now to declare that these sort of predators have no place in our industry - or we all risk our reputations being tarnished. We must show by our actions that they are the a minority, that we are the 99% and that men and women together can make this a safe environment to work without fear. Transgressors must be punished, but the punishment must fit the crime..." And then segue into his "spectrum" bit.

Ok, so maybe I've seen too many West Wing episodes but yeah, reading it again, the "credit" line seems a bit crass. He should have gone down the "proud to be a man in Hollywood" angle...
 
ps Matt was also remiss in not mentioning that men can be victims too... if we believe Anthony Rapp's allegations against Kevin Spacey.
 
There is a big problem with all the current media but apparently we are not allowed to say it because we are men. Take the #me to campaign. Brilliant. Fully admire all those people now standing up against disgusting and abhorant behavior within an industry. But the fact remains that rose mc Gowan took 100,000 hush money and appeared smiling in photos with Harvey years later. Harvey came to light because ONE woman stood up. ONE woman said enough was enough. Where were all the other women? Why wasn’t this shouted from the rooftops? And blaming men for the deafening silence is just ridiculous. I recently told a group of men and women that my wife would be working full time while I took parental leave while my kids were young. The reaction of the women compared to the men was striking. ‘It’s your job to provide for your family’ was thrown out by three of the women. Only one woman defended my choice. You want sexism???? Look at how society looks at parenting.....
 
A couple of posters here need to read the comments on the OP's article and realise that the author got the same comments from men and women. She said the split was maybe 60-40.

Also, whatever her anecdotal experience, this is not a women's-issues-only thing. Cassie Jay had the same sort of whataboutery from women and men when making a documentary about men's issues.

And Matt Damon got shtick not just for saying there were gradations of harrassment, but for speaking at all on the issue. (I could point you at Guardian articles requesting him to shut up because all discussion on the topic should be the exclusive domain of women).
 
Vanilla said:
I actually do despair, whataboutery in practice.
Click to expand...

Whataboutery is classicly justification due to other wrongs, in particular wrongs on the other side prior to that wrong - a staple in the argument over who was to blame for the troubles - a kind of a weighing scales approach.

I don't argue the merit of what you said, respect for women and all that. But sure whats there to talk about in that? Its like lets discuss the merits of motherhood and apple pie, world peace, an end to hunger and other such topics where you'll go a long road to find anything worth talking about.

I posed another perspective on the impact of the current debate, maybe one not so obvious, and you think I'm looking for a pat on the head??!! Must we wave our torches and pitchforks with intense vigour lest we be accused of not being fully on board the hysteria train? Does using the word "hysteria" belie my misogny?, no, its just having being in the workforce for about 20 years I have never seen or heard of anyone getting "touched up" or anything like it. Hollywood is an extreme environment where a few scumbags ran amock, I really don't know what everyone else is getting into such a lather about?

So forgive me if I'm concerned more about the plague of suicide in our own land, predominantly among young men, while the hysteria pushes the message that men are just the lowest form..... than the actions of the very few in a place 5,000 miles away that has no direct relevance to anyone reading this forum. But I'll be doubly sure not to pat anyone on the This post will be deleted if not edited to remove bad language as I pass the photocopier tomorrow :rolleyes:
 
Here's another direct quote especially for you, Betsy Og, since you neatly encapsulate everything the author is saying:

'Second perfect example: Male suicide rates.

We know that the leading cause of death in young men aged 18-35 is suicide. This is the strongest symptom of a patriarchal society where emotionless males struggle to cope with trauma and feelings, can’t open up, don’t feel safe to talk and become completely overwhelmed by emotions they are taught are ‘feminine’, which further induces shame and stigma.
In all my years I have never seen women jump on those campaigns yelling ‘women commit suicide too, you know!!’ Or ‘what about women?’

Switch it over. Women’s marches. Pussy hats. IWD. Counting dead women. VAWG strategies. Women’s health screening. Women’s reproductive health. Women’s mental health. Rape campaigns. #metoo.

There is ALWAYS someone saying ‘what about men though?’ under all of those issues. It’s as sure as taxes and death. '
 
The author is saying she gets spurious complaints that her work focuses solely on women, wow, newsflash, theres eejits in the world. I personally don't begrudge breast cancer campaigns etc. So I dont think this author is the amazing visionary you've latched onto.

If you don't want to discuss anything more interesting then grand, I'll let you have a clear run at the echo chamber.
 
Vanilla said:
We know that the leading cause of death in young men aged 18-35 is suicide. This is the strongest symptom of a patriarchal society where emotionless males struggle to cope with trauma and feelings, can’t open up, don’t feel safe to talk and become completely overwhelmed by emotions they are taught are ‘feminine’, which further induces shame and stigma.
Click to expand...
Can she back that up or is it just her opinion that the "patriarchal society" is to blame for suicide rates among young men? Does she understand irony when she says that in the same article as she talks about victim blaming?
 
Last edited:
Sunny said:
You want sexism???? Look at how society looks at parenting.....
Click to expand...
As a single parent I agree.
The way in which domestic violence is treated is also striking. A friend of mine was attached by his partner. She's much smaller than him but still attacked him, managing to dig her nails into his neck so badly that he needed stitches. He went to the Gardai, still covered in blood (the bleeding was so bad his shirt was drenched and his jeans were also soaked) his with facial scratches and his clothes torn.
The response he got was "Sure you're a big lad, you can defend yourself and why don't you just leave her?"
 
One more thing;
It is fairly common to see Universities offer courses in Woman's studies. How many offer courses in Men's studies? Why is asking that question so threatening to some women?
 
I think Whataboutery is always going to happen in situations like this. When you have articles/campaigns or whatever regarding the rape/attack conducted by a small minority of half of the population, I think it's inevitable that some from the majority of this half of the population are going to say "we're not all like that" and "it happens the other way round too".
 
I think the context of my frustration is the media message which is generally;

Women - wholesome mothers, smiling carers, glamourous socialites

Men - domestically useless, socially awkward, drink drivers, 'bates the wife'.

How many times do we have to wince as the babysitter listens, over the baby monitor, to yer man beating the wife, are we to believe this has no impact on the broad population of men? When is the last time a woman was portrayed as doing something disgraceful in an ad campaign that you'll watch over and over? I don't want women equally blackened, I want less general blackening of men.

Maybe my perception is off, but that's what advertisers are using. So much so that one sacharine exception has warmed my heart (guilty pleasure moment), its the one where the new fella spends loads of time with his partners child, and the little boys ends up calling him Daddy, ahhhs all round. Sure at least it was a positive message for once......
 
I can say that when I was married I did 90% of the cooking and cleaning, all of the washing and ironing and put the kids to bed most nights. When they were babies I did all of the night feeds but didn't get any paternity leave.
I bake with the kids. I do arts and crafts. I sew on buttons and fix hems of skirts and trousers. When they were small I blow dried my daughters hair. I also do the DIY (at the moment I'm dry-lining and plastering a wall). I'm the one who talks to my older daughter about how her makeup looks etc. I'm the one who taught them to cook. All of my male friends can cook. All of them are hands-on dads. None of us feel our masculinity is threatened by any of that sort of thing.
My father can cook and do housework (though he's bugger all use at DIY). His father was a tailor so he can sew etc too.
Why is it okay to continue to perpetuate an outdated and negative stereotype of men in the media and particularly in advertising? Why is the father an idiot in just about every set-com and other TV show aimed at kids? Why is questioning these things dismissed as "whataboutism"? Why can the suicide rate among young men and teenage boys be unquestioningly linked to some sort of "Patriarchy" and not to any of the other factors raised above?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top