If we command our wealth, we shall be rich and free; if our wealth commands us, we are poor indeed.
When Strangers Click, a 2011 documentary about online dating.
It reminds me of that famous Margaret Atwood quote: “Men are afraid that women will laugh at them. Women are afraid that men will kill them.” It also reminds me of something written by one of the mods of Sex Worker Problems: “Misandry irritates. Misogyny kills.”
I mean, it’s just true.
I posted the following response to these kinds of posts months ago but I think it bears repeating:
As a man who has suffered a number of violent crimes, I was somewhat annoyed at how dismissive this post is about the dangers that men and boys face and the experiences of male violent crime victims. I didn’t respond immediately because I didn’t want to write an emotional reponse based solely on my own experiences and feelings. However, after researching crime statistics and victimization rates of different demographics, I’ve gone from somewhat annoyed to livid. My findings:
On average, 77% of homicide victims every year are male. [Source1].
Men are more likely to be victims of violent crime over all, and about five times as likely to be attacked by a stranger. [Source2].
The demographic group most often victimized by violent criminals is teenage boys, who suffer a greater share of gang violence and stranger violence than any other group. [Source2]. Boys are also equally as likely as girls to be victims of dating violence [Source3], and according to the study on sexual victimization in juvenile detention centers from my last post, roughly 90% of cases of sexual misconduct in juvenile detention centers involved a female staff member victimizing a detained minor boy. [Source4].
A recent article about this issue said, “the rate of abuse perpetrated by female guards on male victims is the result of a ‘dangerous combination’ of cultural and institutional problems, not the least of which is the fact that women forcing males into sex does not comport with society’s conventional definition of rape.” [Source5].
"Women forcing males into sex" really doesn’t comport with society’s definition of rape, nor does it comport with the FBI or the CDC’s definitions of rape, which specifically exclude being "made to penetrate" through force, threat, or intoxication from the definition of rape [Source6]. Thus, if a man were held down while a woman forcibly enveloped his penis in her, he would not be counted as a rape victim. If you compare the number of men who reported being “made to penetrate” [Table 2.2 of Source6] with the number of women who reported being raped [Table 2.1 of Source6] within a year of the study, you find that they are roughly equal.
Hopefully, the information I’ve provided is sufficient to convince any reasonable reader that men and boys actually face greater danger walking the streets than women and girls do. In my personal experience, I have been jumped, beaten up, and mugged enough times that during high school, I always carried pepper spray in one pocket, a knife in another pocket, and a large metal spike in my backpack. I used to stuff my money into my shoe in case I got robbed, and tried to do my homework at school whenever possible so that if I got chased, my books wouldn’t drag me down. One of my friends had tried to flee from an attacker, but the assailant had caught him by his backpack and pulled him to the ground so I was concerned about being caught the same way.
That’s why I’m so mad at this post and similar posts I’ve seen on Tumblr, including one that read something to the effect of, “When women go out, they have to worry about rapists and killers. When men go out, they only have to worry about meeting a fat girl. That’s male privilege.” Posts like the one above do nothing but reinforce inaccurate gender stereotypes, dismiss the fears and experiences of male violent crime victims, and strengthen the notion that women and girls need to be afraid to go outside. For anyone who’s really working towards gender equality, these kinds of messages are frustratingly counterproductive.
"I love you."
"And I… admire your persistence."
Recently, Colbert mocked the owner of the Red Skins for not changing their name by saying (I’m paraphrasing here), “Yeah, there’s nothing wrong with that, just like there’s nothing wrong with my mascot ‘Ching Chong Ding Dong,’ which is totally respectful to Orientals or whatever.” So he clearly wasn’t mocking Asians, but highlighting one example of racism (the Red Skins) by juxtaposing the values that the name reflects against a more clear cut example.
Later, a producer put the “Ching Chong Ding Dong” quote up on his twitter account and a lot of people who didn’t know the context behind it got upset and started the terribly misguided #CancelColbert trend. Between this and the Leland Yee fiasco earlier this week, I feel mildly embarrassed to be an Asian American progressive.
Interestingly, I think Colbert and Dave Chappelle suffer from two sides of the same problem. They both use/used racist caricatures to highlight the inherent absurdity of racism. Colbert is taking fire because people think he actually supports those racist caricatures, while Chappelle had/has a lot of “fans” who laugh at Black people rather than laughing at the stereotypes that he wanted to point out.
Man, Kakashi is having a really emotional day.