https://i.pinimg.com/originals/1c/33...09e3555766.pngYour sense of oppression is too weakly conceived if you're implying that oppression of women is non-existant int he west. And perhaps be interested to be critical of the way in which non-western women are portrayed as subject to oppression strictly for cultural reasons and that somehow we're enlightened and beyond it despite often comparable levels of violence against women.
So this sense of feminism only for third worlders or something seems weak unless one has a an increasingly obsolete standard for treatment of women in the west ie liberalism dissolving formal discriminations.
But this need not be the case, except that you're making a reduced focus.
In that maintaining certain gendered practices is based in instilling terror to maintain an illusion that only 'bad' women are subject to sexual violence.
http://lup.lub.lu.se/luur/download?f...ileOId=4461660https://aifs.gov.au/publications/con...street-harassmPatriarchy is a system of beliefs that fundamentally asserts the supremacy of the male (Brinson, 1992:361). It exist through people’s upholding of the structures without questioning them, because it has become a system of norms (Thomsson, ElvinNowak, 2013:38) that include myths, rules and assumptions which with time are taken for granted (Ibid, 2013:30). Men’s position of dominance is normalized through language (Berrington, Jones, 2002:308) and that process includes a normalizing of male aggression. Sexual violence is constructed as a risk that women can protect themselves against, if acting responsible (Ibid:317). By that, women are socialized into fear of male violence (Ibid:319) and thus become subjects of violence and objects of fear (Marcus, 1992:398), the so called subjection process (Ibid:394). Due to that, women are expected to monitor and restrict their behavior (Berrington, Jones, 2002:317) and even hinder their movements in an attempt to ensure the safety of their bodies (Edwards et al, 2011:767). Dr. Eileen Berrington and Dr. Helen Jones, mean that the relationship between the patriarchal construction of the society and the existence of male violence can be understood as part of a system of power (Berrington, Jones, 2002:308).
Rape myths exist in symbiosis with cultural stereotypes of “ideal” behavior for women and men (Brinson, 1992:361). Questioning the behavior of the woman before the rape is the same thing as saying that something she did provoked a man to rape her. By talking about being in the “wrong” place, wearing the “wrong” clothes and acting in the “wrong” way presupposes that there is a right way for women to behave (Ibid:362). These “norms of femininity” as Berrington and Jones chose to call them, describe the cultural attributes and expectations assigned to women (Berrington, Jones, 2002:309). The horror of rape is not that it steals something from women, but that it makes women into things to be taken (Marcus, 1992:399). The production of a norm of behavior is a form of power that regulate, control and normalize and aim to produce docile and useful bodies (Henderson, 2013:238).This creates an assumption that that women can, when behaving correct and responsible, avoid the violence of men (Berrington, Jones, 2002:307). Henderson claims that historically women have been told to avoid rape by restricting their choices, movements and behavior (Henderson, 2013:233).The social nature of such violence directed towards women is often shaped in such a way as to set limits on women's behaviour and restrict their autonomy.However, all of these forms of sexual harassment are interconnected, regardless of intent or the way they are experienced by the recipient, as "the remarks serve multiple functions of social control" (Kissling, 1991, p. 455). Kissling denoted this harassment as a form of "sexual terrorism", which serves to remind women of their status as sexual objects, and "of their vulnerability to these and other violations" (p. 455). It is here that the interconnections between sexual harassment and more severe forms of sexual violence are most apparent. Firstly, sexual harassment functions as a reminder to women of the threat or possibility of something "more serious" occurring, therefore rendering women as sexually vulnerable (Crouch, 2009; Kissling, 1991; Laniya, 2005; Macmillan et al., 2000; Tuerkheimer, 1997). Secondly, both sexual harassment and sexual violence remove women's sexual and bodily autonomy (MacKinnon, 1979), curtail women's behaviour, and are used to threaten, intimidate, and harm women.
https://orbi.ulg.ac.be/bitstream/226...al_jpsp_00.pdfThough because there have indeed been advancements in women's rights in terms of being recognized in the abstract as equal citizens, granting women formal autonomy, the matter of it being substantive is another issue that is seemingly incomprehensible within a liberal framework.The authors argue that complementary hostile and benevolent components of sexism exist across cultures. Male dominance creates hostile sexism (HS), but men's dependence on women fosters benevolent sexism (BS)--subjectively positive attitudes that put women on a pedestal but reinforce their subordination. Research with 15,000 men and women in 19 nations showed that (a) HS and BS are coherent constructs that correlate positively across nations, but (b) HS predicts the ascription of negative and BS the ascription of positive traits to women, (c) relative to men, women are more likely to reject HS than BS, especially when overall levels of sexism in a culture are high, and (d) national averages on BS and HS predict gender inequality across nations. These results challenge prevailing notions of prejudice as an antipathy in that BS (an affectionate, patronizing ideology) reflects inequality and is a cross-culturally pervasive complement to HS.
The more sexist the nation, the more women, relative to men, accepted BS, even to the point, in the four nations with the highest mean sexism scores (Botswana, Cuba, Nigeria, South Africa), of endorsing BS significantly more than men did. In general, relative to men, women were more accepting of BS than of HS, suggesting that members of subordinate groups fmd ostensibly benevolent prejudice more acceptable than hostile prejudice toward their group.
The evidence is consistent with the idea that women adopt BS as a form of self-defense when overall levels of sexism in a culture are high. HS and BS work together as a particularly effective method of system maintenance: When men are high in HS, women have a strong incentive to accept BS to gain men's protection, admiration, and affection and as a means of avoiding men's hostility. Faced with hostility from a more powerful group if they choose to reject conventional female roles and rewarded with men's benevolence for conforming to those roles, it is not surprising that many women choose to adopt prescribed roles and the ideology (BS) that supports them (see also Eagly, 1987; Jackman, 1994; Ridgeway, 1992). This is similar to arguments made by Smuts (1996) and Jackman (1994) that the threat of male aggression leads women to seek protection by pair bonding with men. Such effects are ironic, as women are driven to seek protection from members of the very group that threatens or oppresses them, and the greater the threat (i.e., the more men endorse HS), the stronger the incentive to seek male protection (rather than independence).
And it's a big problem among many policy fuck ups in regards to the justice and prison system particularly in the US for example.Secondly, men technically get raped more often, once you take into account prison rape.
Although it's unclear what this fact on it own is meant to make in that it's left implicit, the uncharitable interpretation being, men have it rough to. Which need not be denied, but if its somehow meant to negate the prevalence of sexual violence against women and its social implications in how its framed as a problem whcih women must restrict themselves in various ways, it doesn't seem to make a point against anything but simply raise a fact independently.
Unless there is something more to unpack.Thirdly, unless if our society is a "rape culture", where the raping and sexual harassment of women are seen as normal and does not constitute as a crime, then I don't see what argument you are trying to put up here. Statistics on response rates may not be helpful, since both male and female victims of sex crimes may not end up reporting to the authorities about it, due to fear of ridicule.Ah, I see you do end up making a relative argument which you should no makes a point separate from the issue.either way, if you wanted real oppression, then how about traveling to a third world country.
If there's people starving and without water in another country, this doesn't negate anything happening to me. It doesn't negate whether it's terrible or not or make a point to argue that thinking of a certain thing as terrible is somehow inappropriate/incorrect.
One should be sensitive to the way one abstracts because one can trivialize even those problems by a point of relativity in which nothing matters and shouldn't care about anything. I think it happens to be a piss poor standard to in regards to measuring our success if we're to compare ourselves to those with say histories of colonization and imperialism as if they're able to be liberal democracies as in the west.The existence of things such as mansplaining and manspreading doesn't give a hint of the problems as they exist in the west but problems as they exist in the lives of middle class folks in those countries who are distant from working with such social problems.
†The fact that you live in a country where "mansplaining" and "manspreading" is a thing should already hint the severity of the problem here in the west.
statistics from my country:
Should we now only act as though homicides and physical assault affect men? Want to fight against rape?
Well, then stop acting as though it is a "women only problem", and keep gender out of it. Now I can understand only focusing on one gender when it comes to societies that see raping a woman as fine, but in the west, that is not the case.
One should not measure such issues on such terms unless want to set a low bar on drivel in sensationalist media rather than serious discussion.
And in regards to violence against men, that similar trend is replicated in my home country Australia, where men are more likely to be physically assaulted by strangers in public and alcohol also exacerbates it.
Whilst women are more likely to be assaulted by someone they know in the home.
But for many that seem to show an interest in things affecting men, its difficult to get people to see issue with such prevalent violence as when issues of violence against women are raised I believe.
There isn't the political climate that is hostile to it, it's just not a point of discussion for many apparently who don't seem to see it as a social problem in the way feminists have taken on violence against women historically.
There were some mens groups that emerged from the feminist movement, many that became hippyish individualized psychology stuff rather than social issues of gendered relations.
Although some good stuff still remains https://www.xyonline.net/
I think it's unfair that you characterize benty's position as a woman only problem, it seems that you've perhaps had negative experiences in the past with feminists or something and you're speaking from a position as if they fit your conception of an average one.
And I think in regards to the concept of rape culture is constituted by more than rape not being viewed as a crime.
And theres also the issue in which people in the abstract may believe something but in practice function in problematic ways.
And in regards to what attitudes do prevail, you might be interested in exploring debates around the idea of there being a gap in the justice systems efficacy in charging and convicting rapists, based in myths that are a self fulfilling prophecy.
http://digitalcommons.pace.edu/cgi/v...76&context=plrhttps://www.sentencingcouncil.vic.go...ch%20Paper.pdfAlthough the connection between rape myths and conviction rates has long been demonstrated, the need for a contemporary, scholarly study that compellingly reiterates this connection is, perhaps aptly, provided by those legal practitioners interviewed as part of the authors’ UK-based research.10 When asked about the existence of the justice gap, only one of the twenty-four interviewed (seventeen judges and seven barristers) “was prepared to concede that there was in fact a justice gap.”11 “Other interviewees denied or showed resistance to this idea, and some were plainly annoyed at the suggestion.”12 The authors importantly go on to identify the contradiction between this rejection of the notion of a justice gap—which a number of interviewees described as a “concoction” of women’s groups13— and the observations of the participants about the difficulties of conviction when there is no “real rape”:
Many interviewees considered that the idea of a justice gap was based on fundamental misunderstandings about the nature of rape cases in which so frequently it was one person’s word against another so that the burden of proof would necessarily be very difficult for the prosecution to discharge. Yet they themselves had pointed to the problems in processing rape caused by failures in evidence-gathering, weak prosecuting and reliance on stereotypical thinking, all of which have a bearing on whether the burden of proof is regarded by juries as having been satisfied. 14
The authors’ research makes the case for the need to continue to talk about “real rape” and how the dissonance between reports and convictions can be explained, not by lack of evidence, but by preconceived notions of what rape looks like and how a “real victim” will act. Rather than explaining the justice gap as a result of the difficulties of proof when credibility is the main issue, Temkin and Krahīe argue that “[p]erceptions of rape are influenced by stereotypes, bias and gender prejudice. . . . [I]t is this attitude problem that needs to be addressed if the justice gap is to be reduced.”15 Judgments about sexual assault, the authors say, are “skewed in the direction of low conviction rates partly because of the widely held attitudes about rape which undermine the position of the complainant and benefit the defendant.”16
Although the issue should be considered beyond the judicial context as thats a rather restricted and conservative avenue.
My arrogant suggestion to you is to look at critiques of liberalism and make explicit it's limitations.
Because feminism didn't succeed, liberal reforms in regards to women did and its in fact the liberal attitude that give such a post-feminist sentiment. I hope that your concern for men is more meaningful for you then a reaction to any feminist seeming views and opinions. Which is whats wrong with my assault and men thread. The views spark up to dengrate poorly views of social problems of women, which need not be at the expense of men except when whats asserted politically opposes.
Generally its easy for people to care some in the abstract about men and women on gender issues. But with such concern you should no doubt be able to acknowledge it sint some utopia for women because of knee jerk reactions to the intellectual degradation that comes in a postmodernist mileau.
Replicating the abstract individuality that things individual choice without formal discrimination by law is the epitome of freedom and entirely neglects the matter of a substantive autonomy of women. How they empirically exist and in relation to how they potentially could be instead of in relation to the worst societies in regards to treatment and autonomy of women.