In Canada, there has been much discussion about violence against indigenous people. It is also a controversial topic for Prime Minister Stephen Harper (leader of the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada), as well as Justin Trudeau (leader of the Liberal Party of Canada) and Thomas Mulcair (leader of the New Democratic Party, or NDP). With the federal election approaching in 2015, the way these candidates are handling this topic is proving to have an effect on voters.
The reason this bears mentioning is because it is viewed with little, if any, concern for the men who are victims (like many other examples, as seen below). As we already know, there has always been a generally accepted (and misandric) rule that men are less valuable than women; hence, the “women and children first” rule. Feminists cover this up by saying it is sexism against women that men die first (which shows how out of touch with reality they really are), but when the lifeboats arrive, or when the server brings the bill, all of a sudden equality goes out the window. But it is taken a step further when men are disregarded as the victim not only in general circumstances but also while being heroic. Here are some examples of the ways in which we treat female victims as if they are suffering more, even if they are statistically suffering less.
The media has informed us recently about how many Native women have gone missing or been murdered. Twitter users even use #AmINext as a way of raising awareness for the women who have gone missing. Organizations, articles, and campaigns feature the women and girls who are being victimized (like this and this and this and this and this and many more). To their credit, the campaigns are correct in saying that Aboriginals are murdered at higher rates (approximately five times) than non-Aboriginals. However, there is one thing missing: MALE VICTIMS! We know that murder rates between the sexes are similar to those of the general population, for which the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) reports men are about 68% of homicide victims and women are the remaining 32%. Yet when one searches for campaigns and organizations raising awareness for the male victims, there is a scarcity.
It is one thing for our media to show us that it is acceptable to be violent toward men, but it is exponentially worse for our legal system to do the same. First of all, the rates of domestic violence across Canada’s 10 provinces (see Table 1.2; “current and previous relationship”) involve 6% of men and 6.4% of women. Since the rates are so close together, one would think that the number of shelters available would be proportional. Wrong! As of 2010, there are 593 abused women’s shelters. How many for men? There was one, run by Earl Silverman, but since his suicide (to my knowledge) there are none. Of the 593 women’s shelters, 47 (or 8%) will admit men.
Public Sphere Violence
Remember from the first point that I mentioned that men are the majority of homicide victims and victims of most violent crimes? Well, you would think that would be enough to get citizens to intervene when a man is being assaulted or harassed. Based on awareness videos (like this one and this one), we see that men are not only left to fend for themselves, but they are also laughed at, mocked, and ridiculed.
Breast Cancer v. Prostate Cancer
First of all, the colour pink associated with breast cancer (e.g., the pink ribbon) causes us to think of femininity and female victims. This contributed to 80% of surveyed men not knowing men could even get breast cancer. As far as mortality rates, breast cancer kills 1 in 29 women, while prostate cancer kills 1 in 36 men. Those numbers are not too far apart, so you would think that the funding for research and treatment of these diseases would be proportional. Or since we apparently live in a patriarchy, you would think prostate cancer would get more funding. But surprise, surprise: in 2009, breast cancer received $872 million in funding, while prostate cancer received only $399 million in funding.
This one is similar to the Native Canadians example in that men/boys and women/girls are being victimized and yet we hear only about the female victims. There was #BringBackOurGirls on Twitter, and yet nothing to raise awareness of male victims. Many people who I’ve spoken to about this were unaware that Boko Haram was even targeting boys.
Feminist Treatment of Male Victims
We couldn’t discuss the lack of concern for male victims without mentioning our favourite hate group. Feminists have a real soft spot for men, and some of these gems really show it:
- Hillary Clinton: “Women have always been the primary victims of war. Women lose their husbands, their fathers, their sons in combat.“
Women certainly are victims of war, but unless they themselves were in combat, they are not the primary victims. The members of combat are the primary victims. You know, the ones who lose their mental health, limbs, or even their lives. They are the primary victims. The women who lose husbands, fathers, and sons are called secondary victims. That is not to marginalize their loss but to recognize the sacrifices that our members of combat have made.
- Catherine Comins: “Men who are unjustly accused of rape can sometimes gain from the experience.“
Yes, because those gains include getting kicked out of school, getting fired from your job, gaining a criminal record, spending time in jail while labelled the lowest criminal besides murderer (somehow feminists think this is a rape culture?!), having increased likelihood of being victimized while behind bars, having difficulty finding a new job once you are released and the stigma of “rapist” or “accused rapist.” That doesn’t even include the emotional turmoil falsely accused men endure. Yet men are supposed to call that a gainful experience?
- Many feminists: “What men fear most about going to prison is what women fear most about walking down the sidewalk.“
Women walking down the sidewalk have more protections and resources available; they have access to more in the way of counselling, therapy, and other mental health treatment options; they have the support of their friends and family; and they know that innocent bystanders will intervene on their behalf at a moment’s notice. Men in prison, on the other hand, do not. On the sidewalk, men have greater reason to fear being victimized than women, so if we were to even try to compare women on the sidewalk to men in prison, feminists would be crushed into the dust on this argument. But, feminists, thank you for marginalizing the suffering that inmates endure. I can’t imagine why people think feminists hate men …
- Mary Koss: “It is inappropriate to consider as a rape victim a man who engages in unwanted sexual intercourse with a woman.“
This one should speak for itself. According to Koss, forced sex is rape only as long as it is not a woman forcing a man to have sex. In this case, she is not only showing a lack of concern for male victims, but she is also refusing to even acknowledge that they are victims to the same extent that women would be.
- Sheryl Sandberg: “We need to help [girls] lean in.” (Ban Bossy campaign video)
We know that men earn the minority of college degrees. We know that boys are more likely to drop out than girls. Boys are falling behind girls in language (reading, writing and oral) skills. And Sheryl Sandberg wants to invent a problem to turn girls back into the victim again? Girls are much less interested in leadership than boys (we also see this in politics), as per their biology. Yet when boys fall behind girls, we still care more about girls.
All of this is truly sad considering that feminists will have us believe we live in a society in which female victims are blamed. Like always, feminists got it wrong. Not only do we not blame female victims, but they also receive more sympathy and consideration than male victims. Some patriarchy this is!