Misogyny and violence

Those progressives at Vox:

Every high-profile shooting has unique circumstances, and every killer has different motivations. But extreme misogyny is such a common thread in so many of them that we can no longer ignore its role in public violence.

Hmm.

To study the potential differences that distinguish homicides involving women as victims or offenders from those involving men, we analyzed Federal Bureau of Investigation Uniform Crime Reports data on homicides that occurred in the United States between 1976 and 1987. Only cases that involved victims aged 15 years or older were included. Persons killed during law enforcement activity and cases in which the victim’s gender was not recorded were excluded. A total of 215,273 homicides were studied, 77% of which involved male victims and 23% female victims.

I’d say there’s a fair amount of misandry out there myself.

37 thoughts on “Misogyny and violence”

  1. So Much For Subtlety

    The key words are “high profile”. We don’t care about men shooting men. We do care about men shooting women. Although not much.

    However they are probably wrong simply on the facts. The Orlando shooting was of a Gay club. I am guessing not many women were killed. Although it is hard to tell. Was Brenda L. Marquez McCool a woman? Don’t ask me.

  2. So Much For Subtlety

    Of course what they mean by “extreme misogyny” is the Christian community and the Republicans.

    They are shameless hacks ruthlessly exploiting a tragedy. Spitting on them would be too kind.

  3. “homicides that occurred in the United States between 1976 and 1987. Only cases that involved victims aged 15 years or older were included. Persons killed during law enforcement activity and cases in which the victim’s gender was not recorded were excluded. A total of 215,273 homicides were studied”: Christ’s sake, nearly 20k murders p.a. after excluding three classes!

  4. More recent stats from the UK to rebuff the polemical identity politics nonsense of the vox article –

    “In 2012/13, as in previous years, more than two-thirds of homicide victims (69%) were male. However among those aged under one victims of homicide were just as likely to be male as female”.

    -UK National Archives

    The 2 previous attempts to murder MPs, which happened during their constituent surgeries, and which nearly succeeded, were against men.

  5. If you believe in a structural analysis in which actions are mere superstructure, and if you believe that the entire structure is power relations between oppressor and victim classes, that oppression being the meaning of “hate”, this is the only sort of conclusion you can possibly reach.

    Remember, when they use the word “hate”, whether directly or indirectly as with “misogyny”, they are not referring to an emotional state. Hate in the jargon of post-marxism always means the expression of class power relations. Hence for instance when a man looks at a Page 3 girl, despite hate being the last emotion that might be in his mind, to post-marxists the action of viewing a page 3 girl is a superstructural expression of class power relations, and thus it is an act of “hate” (misogyny).

  6. Yes, shooting gay men is an indicator of misogyny – just like gay porn is because while straight porn is exploitive of women, gay porn says that they don’t matter.

    Same here. Shoot women and you hate women and shooting men says that women aren’t worth shooting.

  7. “dearieme
    June 19, 2016 at 3:57 pm
    Christ’s sake, nearly 20k murders p.a. after excluding three classes!”

    Out of (at the time) 225 million people.

    But once we get rid of the guns our rate should drop down to, say, where Columbia’s is.

  8. Extreme misogyny is a big problem–unless you are importing extreme misogynists–in which case it isn’t worth thinking about or mentioning in any media.

  9. I really would question whether there is such a thing as “misogyny” at all, at least in any way that it is used at the moment. The Islamic world isn’t “misogynist” either. It just has a very different set of rules regarding gender relations to ours, which developed to prevent sexual contact not sanctioned by the family.

    Digging around a while ago, I found American news reports of “public morals” committees complaining that women were going around unchaperoned, that males and females were bathing together (like, swimming type bathing I mean). Feminist/progressive doyenne Jane Addams complained greatly in her book on “White Slavery” that allowing women into the workplace corrupted their morals, due to them being away from their mothers’ control and allowing them to earn money to purchase tarty clothes.

    So maybe not even that different. Just a bit behind the times.

  10. IanB

    Hate in the jargon of post-marxism always means the expression of class power relations.

    Interesting and very plausible. Is this your own insight, or have you any references?

    The Islamic world isn’t “misogynist” either. It just has a very different set of rules regarding gender relations to ours, which developed to prevent sexual contact not sanctioned by the family.

    But Islamic treatment of women goes way beyond “rules…developed to prevent sexual contact not sanctioned by the family”. Women are second-class citizens in Islamic societies, and it is hard to see what diminishing female legal testimony or property rights has to do with preventing unsanctioned sexual contact. Obsessive control of women through FGM and numerous legal restrictions suggests a fear of women and a need to subjugate and control them – in a word, hate, or misogyny.

  11. Ever since that MP stood up and read out a list of female murder victims there seem to have been a large number of news reports about women murdering kids, men, etc.

    Awkward.

  12. Bloke in Lower Hutt

    I’m calling bullshit on that study, do they really expect me to believe that 215,000 murder victims were interviewed to determine where they considered themselves to be on the gender spectrum. Then the authors have the sheer arrogance to infer from that whether the victim was ‘male’ or ‘female’, talk about kicking someone when they’re down or some such similar bollocks. Nurse, nurse, the voices have started again….

  13. Theo, misogyny as defined by feminism is a cultural marxist analysis as I outlined above. I don’t have a specific reference to offer, it’s a general understanding.

    The other and different point I was making was that because some rule renders a person inferior in social status, it doesn’t mean you hate them. Feudal peasants were second class compared to aristocrats, but I wouldn’t explain that with “hatred”. I would explain that as a system which evolved to particular historical circumstances. That doesn’t mean I approve, it just means that in my view anyway “hate” is a useless way to understand social systems.

    Or to get classical, the Spartan system of brutal oppression of Helots wasn’t about “hate” either. It was (a) a slavery system predicated on the total militarisation of Sparta and (b) the resultant fear of a Helot uprising.

  14. I’m calling bullshit on that study, do they really expect me to believe that 215,000 murder victims were interviewed to determine where they considered themselves to be on the gender spectrum.

    The world’s longest and most boring horror film.

  15. @ Ian B
    The total miltarisation of *male Spartiates*.
    The concern about the danger of a Helot rebellion was a perfectly reasonable one given the vast ratio of Helots: Spartiates. I don’t know what that ratio was *but*, since every male Spartiate was allocated a farm, worked solely by Helots, to provide him with an income for life (the profit that is, after feeding and clothing the Helots and paying for any external inputs) sufficient to pay for his military nequipment and support his wife and family, including feeding and clothing any Helot domestic servants, it must have been huge.
    I don’t think we know whether the oppression was actually brutal. It could have been based on the mythology that every Spartiate was 50% tougher than granite so it wasn’t worth trying to fight the slaveowner – the Spartan army didn’t guard their camp at night, just the weapons, so the Helots accompanying them could have fallen on the outnumbered weaponless sleeping Spartiates but AFAIK they never did. In the end what beat them was that they virtually died out (I suspect that the Pelopennesian War wrecked Sparta’s future nearly as much as Athens’) as the army defeated by the Romans was largely comprised of Helots: there just weren’t enough Spartiates left to form an army.

  16. john77-

    i donut claim to be an export on classical geese, but i think that all reputable exports agree with me twat the Sparticans whore fear full of the Harlots and thrush implement ted wise polices to pre.vent them uprising. Lube me up baby oh yes make it hurt. other onions on this subtext are neoliberal sophistry.. .#

    -sent from my RitchiePhone

  17. So Much For Subtlety

    Anmd yet again we get an example of real misogyny at work – and the indifference of the Left to actual genuine misogyny from non-White non-Christians.

    Newsnight has been following one of the Merkel Youth who are busy enriching Britain. No doubt to focus on the dreadful racism the poor dear has to face in modern England.

    One of them is charged with sexual offenses against a 14 year old girl. Newsnight refused to report it for three weeks:

    http://heatst.com/uk/bbc-suppressed-report-of-sex-assault-of-14-year-old-by-syrian-gang/

    Lying about it still.

  18. In Australia, misogyny means the male leader of the opposition looking at his watch while the female is going off on one.

  19. Sadly, I have met — indeed work with — men who despise the input of women, and actively denigrate them. They don’t hate women as such, but they hate having to listen to them or respect their opinion.

    And you do see it in public. I don’t like Hillary Clinton, but some of the abuse sent her way is clearly misogynist. Supporters of Chris Christie who have the cheek to call Clinton “fat”. Supporters of Trump who describe her as “ugly”. Even if she was fat and ugly, it still doesn’t have any bearing on her as a politician. Women really do get different and entirely unwarranted comments on their appearance that men don’t get.

    But I also know women who pretty much hate all men, merely for being male. It annoys me that they get a free pass where men cannot go.

  20. Emeritus Professor of Ancient Stuff, Cambridge

    Classical Greek civilisation died out because the men spent too much time bumming each other, rather than impregnating their wives.
    Now that’s misogyny-

  21. So Much For Subtlety

    Chester Draws – “Even if she was fat and ugly, it still doesn’t have any bearing on her as a politician. Women really do get different and entirely unwarranted comments on their appearance that men don’t get.”

    Women and men are always judged unequally. Hillary is judged as any other women would be judged. That means she gets catty comments about her weight and looks. Men also get judged in ways that women do not. It is entirely possible that the sexes are judged differently but equally. In fact I would think that women are judged more generously than men.

    And being fat is certainly a moral issue.

    Emeritus Professor of Ancient Stuff, Cambridge – “Classical Greek civilisation died out because the men spent too much time bumming each other, rather than impregnating their wives. Now that’s misogyny-”

    Clearly they were sparing them from the evils of patriarchy.

  22. @Chester, but the abuse Trump gets for his hairstyle doesn’t count? To be in a position in authority means that it is natural that you will get people pointing out physical details.

  23. @Theo
    Western culture had much the same attitudes to women, for a lot of its history. For much the same reasons. In a society where might is right, women are vulnerable. So need protecting. And protection always requires restriction of freedoms, to enable the protection.
    Don’t we still have a vestige of this in law? A woman not being compelled to testify against her husband in court? Or was that abolished.?

  24. Most women claiming misogyny do so because, short of any other notable achievement in their lives, fancy going down in history as modern day Suffragettes. I have had two women accuse me of misogyny and “violence” in the past two years, both of whom came through New York feminist movements in one form or another:

    1) Accused me outright of violence towards her, which resulted in an “Eh?” from me. She clarified that it was “emotional violence”, and upon further clarification it was actually my being rather unimpressed with the unsolicited stories of her one-night stands. This woman was in her mid-30s.

    2) A mate of a woman who I knew ranting about me on Facebook because I had told her (the woman) that unless she sorts her life out pronto she’s headed for a lonely life in a one-bed apartment with a lot of cats. The thread beneath quickly turned to “rape culture” and how I was a physical threat to her.

    It’s almost like these women want their crazed fantasies of violence to be true to validate their ludicrous claims. David Thompson covers this stuff pretty well.

  25. I don’t like Hillary Clinton, but some of the abuse sent her way is clearly misogynist.

    Clinton gets off lightly compared to Sarah Palin, and that was dished out by the very people complaining of misogyny.

  26. I’d say there’s a fair amount of misandry out there myself.

    Clearly Tim didn’t get the memo from the feminists.

    There is no such thing as misandry, cannot be in fact, because under patriarchy male oppression (of women), privilege and domination is total.

    Even if a women were to hate a man, it would be totally justified because of her oppression under the patriarchy.

  27. What John Galt said. Misogyny (and by extension misandry) are structural power relations. So to demonstrate misandry, you’d have to show structural oppression by a matriarchy.

    I wish people on the “Right” or anti-Left or whatever would stop trying to join in with the structuralism. You can’t. It ends up as a “he who smelt it dealt it” type argument. Stop going on about “real misogyny” from Muslims or anyone else. Reject the model.

  28. “There is no such thing as misandry, cannot be in fact, because under patriarchy male oppression (of women), privilege and domination is total.”

    But…doesn’t this mean the Irish abortion law is not mysoginist or an example of the Patriarchy dominating women, because Irish men are an oppressed minority and hence incapable of oppressing others?

    You have to be fucking mad to believe in any of this crap.

  29. But…doesn’t this mean the Irish abortion law is not mysoginist or an example of the Patriarchy dominating women, because Irish men are an oppressed minority and hence incapable of oppressing others?

    Irish men cannot be oppressed by anyone as they are white males and as such rulers of patriarchy. Admittedly, there are power inequalities in white males (elite vs. middle class vs. working class), but this in itself is an almost arbitrary abstraction compared to the oppression of women and other minorities.

    You have to be fucking mad to believe in any of this crap.

    Absolutely, but the thing is this “crap” is taught in schools at every level of education in relation to “Gender Studies”, “Womens Studies” and a thousand variations.

    It sounds mad because it requires belief in an all powerful “patriarchy” which in reality does not exist. This is just the gender wars version of cultural Marxist at its most asinine.

    In another era, any women (or man) foolish enough to believe this crap would be certified as delusional and locked up for her (or his) own safety.

    Welcome to the Mad House.

  30. ‘Even if she was fat and ugly, it still doesn’t have any bearing on her as a politician.’

    If? IF?

    We learned in 1960 that appearance is critical in presidential politics. Kennedy won; Nixon lost. Because of their looks. Ms Clinton’s looks are a serious problem for her.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *