The whole thing is fucked all to hell and we have a whole bunch of people afraid of the other gender perpetuating this nightmare of violence, abuse, unhinged reality, and inequality. These violent delights, have violent ends.

However, we can choose to see the beauty in the world. We can love each other, laugh, teach, revel in the mysteries, and hold each other in comfort. There is so much we have achieved as a species, but we are also so good at holding ourselves back. Sometimes, we just need to crash in to each other. To get some kind of connection, even if it is the wrong one.

There is so much more to say, but painting the universe takes time. Go. Be beautiful my friend, and good night.

You know that it’s entirely possible to live in a generally patriarchal society, while some men have it shit, right? No one is arguing that we live in absolute patriarchy.

Men are stronger and don’t carry the species’ children, so nature is a bit biased towards them in some ways. But you’re right, it’s not easy. That just explains why it’s mostly men that rise to the very top. There’s a lot of society below that top that gets conveniently ignored in these discussions, including a lot of ditch digging.

Theoretically, yes, practically, no.

Like, if you got epilepsy, your muscles can cramp, and destroy your body tissue that way. That doesn’t mean it happens under any normal circumstances.

On top of that, I can’t imagine why someone would even Google something like this outside of domestic violence related reasons. Are people really expecting to find out from google why their spouse is upset with them in a typical argument?

I’d say the de facto differences between the sexes is that one can kill their partner at the cost of sacrificing his own freedom in the process (believe it or not, straight to jail), while the other can utterly and entirely ruin the other’s life without any consequences at all, or even positive consequences like praise and recognition.

The one who doesn’t have an irrational temper?

Interesting that wife yelling requires fewer steps to stop

Your gaslighting is obnoxious.

I dont really expect a calm discussion or response but is the issue also not a language and cultural one.

Don’t we innately - through culture - perceive and connotate “being yelled at” by femme- and masc-presenting people differently?

So those 6% of men don’t deserve support or empathy when they die? What are you saying here?

since we’re bringing up stats. overwhelming majority of homeless people, prisoners, war victims, work accidents, and suicide victims are men. i get that men are more prone to violence, however verbal abuse often goes underreported and many studies show women are much more likely to engage in verbal abuse. my point is, both genders have issues that all stem from the same underlying problems (capitalism, healthcare, education). the reason women are often portrayed as victims is because of our cultural and genetic history, mixed with a biased media that profits off of “damstrels in distress”

And I suspect that in those reminding 6% a good fraction is still done by male (in homosexual couples)

While you’re trying to be smart, maybe THINK about what you’re saying.

“Your approach is obnoxious…” Oh, I’m sorry, so we shouldn’t offer help because it doesn’t affect a majority and it’s annoying to some?

You and everyone who upvoted you is pathetic and incapable of empathy. Shame on you and everyone who agrees.

So why isn’t domestic abuse listed at all for when it’s the woman yelling?

Statistics don’t make double standards ok.

It seems like you’re attempting to say this kind of thing is ok because “only” 25% of men are victims.

Shameful.

What a toxic take. Because a smaller percentage of men are affected by violent abuse that means they shouldn’t be offered support for verbal abuse?

Way to cherry pick the most extreme stat to disguise the fact that domestic abuse is far closer to a 50/50 split than you want to admit.

Or perhaps, and hear me out, it could also be that men don’t speak up as often. Maybe they don’t die as often! Its almost like modern statistics on these topics have to consider the non reporting rate.

WHY DOES SOMEONE HAVE TO DIE FOR THEM TO BE ABUSED “BAD ENOUGH” TO DESERVE HOTLINE REPRESENTATION?

Domestic violence, by count of occurrences, has been shown to be around 50/50, with a slight lean towards women instigating slightly more often.

This is not taking into account how hard the partner hits or how much damage they cause, but women do aggress on men about the same as the other way around.

Seems to have started a conversation…

@candywashing “While husband abuse does happen, it is less statistically common”

Not according to the CDC’s studies, or honestly almost every other study about the issue.

@Dble

Awareness of the double standard is exactly how it will get fixed. No need to be defeatist.

Sorry but this is exactly what really rubs my gears about this topic. Whenever there’s something like this or a man trying to post about his abuse there’s always someone, mostly women, who try to shut them up & argue about domestic abuse towards women. It’s as if that somehow excuses it, or makes it not as important when it it is being done to men.

I also want to remind you that men are much less likely to actually report, or let alone even talk about domestic abuse done to them. A lot of domestic abuse done by women, such as slapping or various verbal abuse (insults, yelling, manipulation, gaslighting etc), are also often not even seen as abusive, but rather as the norm within our society. This causes statistics to be inherently flawed.

Either way though… “Who does it the most” is not actually any sort of valid argument AGAINST proper & equal help line texts in a search engine, or equal laws, or equal societal norms & standards. You generally shouldn’t demand to be treated equal but then punch in the other direction whenever it suits you. That’s now how that works and just makes you look like a hypocrite.

It’s scary.

This is the response I was hoping was here.

Statistically speaking, however,

This way of looking at things is called collectivism. It’s the sort of philosophy that considers it okay to treat and individual according to the average experience of their group. For example, when someone points out that a woman can easily get help and a man is told to stop and consider his abuser’s needs, collectivism says “yeah but that man’s problem is smaller”.

Well, that’s the implication. That his problem is smaller than a woman’s problem would be.

It’s never actually said. Instead it’s described in terms of statistics and numbers. And these numbers describe the collective experience, not the individual experience.

OP is making a complaint from an individualist point of view: if a particular man is being abused, then that man faces significant obstacles in getting help.

Just because fewer men than women experience problem X, doesn’t mean that a man with problem X suffers less than a woman with problem X.

Dismissing the experience of the individual, or implying that it’s “bullshit” to highlight that individual experience (which is horrifying, as I know from being on one side of this issue, which is all the perspective I need to evaluate how horrible it feels and whether it’s okay).

People think the words collectivism and individualism map to:

Collectivism: considering others’ needs

or

Individualism: considering only one’s own needs

That’s not what those words mean. What they mean is:

Collectivism: Considering the needs of a group, and making ethical decisions based on group situation descriptors (such as statistics) and the implied sums of experience. Holding groups responsible, as a unit, for crimes. Recognizing groups, as a unit, for their accomplishments.

Individualism: Considering the needs of the individual, and making ethical decisions based on the individual’s situation (such as stories, relationships, health status, etc). Punishing or rewarding individuals for the actions they themselves committed.

But it’s not even a matter of policy primarily. It’s not like this policy is collectivist and that policy is individualist. Most prominently, these are lenses through which to view the world.

One of the dangers of collectivism is exactly this kind of reasoning (when collectivism is applied erroneously to individual policy or problem evaluation). Because more women experience X problem than men, we should prioritize the individual women’s problems over the individual man’s problems.

I am not accusing you of having said or implied the previous sentence

Now, collectivism isn’t bad or good. Individualism isn’t bad or good. The danger arises when one doesn’t distinguish between them. In the above italicized thought, for instance, a collective issue is used to make decisions about individual response. That’s not so good.

An example of good collectivist reasoning and ethics would be like: “After experimenting with different carbon tax rates, we have found that $65 per ton extracted results in the climate stabilizing”.

Collective problem, collective analysis (those atmospheric CO2 readings basically involve all of us), collective solution (a law, which applies to everyone in the group, i.e. all Earthers)

An example of good individualist reasoning and ethics would be like: “Mike is constantly yelled at by Susan. Almost every day, she goes off the handle and yells at him for hours. His health is suffering from this. Therefore we’re connecting Mike with a shelter and a social worker who’s going to help him learn that he’s too valuable to accept that treatment”

Collectivism, Individualism. Two lenses for looking at problems, just like physics and chemistry are two ways of looking at the world.

While I’m not outraged at Google, I do think they should absolutely add the help notice to the men’s one since there’s no downside to it and some people could still be helped

Streisand effect go!

Thanks for minimizing the abuse I went through. Fuck you. Maybe a big part of why men are underrepresented in abuse statistics is because we are considered the abuser by default and are expected to just suck it up and take it. Go eat a bag of dicks, apologist.

Yeah but if someone is searching “why is my wife/husband yelling at me,” the statistics on abuse for that sub-popularion may not be as skewed. And providing resources for men (especially men with children) doesn’t take Google that much more effort/money, and it provides a much needed service. As it stands, it is nearly impossible for an abused man (especially one with children) to seek out help using the types of services that are available for women. So if Google can help with that search a little bit, what’s the harm in showing that info? Aaand, even for someone searching about their abusive husband, the googler may be a man, and most services that are for abused women don’t have resources for men.

Yes, but the statistics are suspect. Are we going by reports? By people who get help? By people who ask? Convictions?

There was a professor where I live about 20 or 30 years ago who was researching domestic violence. The more data she collected the more it started to appear the domestic violence against men was about as high as it was against women. When she presented her results, she lost her tenure.

This was before the internet was well established, I heard it on the radio, and I don’t remember her name. But I just looked at this page by Stastics Canada. Note this line:

In 2019, spousal violence continued to be significantly more common among women, with 4.2% of women experiencing such violence compared with 2.7% of men.

Now here’s the interesting part. If we assume the gender spilt is 50% male and 50% female, which is very close to reality, that means women are 61% of the victims of domestic violence (4.2÷(4.2+2.7)). That’s a pretty small difference in my opinion, and pretty dismissive of 39% of the victims of abuse.

The biggest problem with statistics is it doesn’t illustrate the full picture - most men in that position don’t even realise they’re being abused, or refuse to come out and acknowledge it.

Those men don’t end up as apart of the statistic. So the statistic is more a indicator as to which gender is more likely to report their abuser, than which gender Is actually a victim.

No statistic is going to be accurate, because it generally relies on the data being available, when often not all of it is.

Many changes start with people posting about it, like it is very likely if this blew up Google would modify the search term to include the help line for both, so I disagree that it is bullshit in that regard regardless of OP’s intent

Imagine being told that your pain matters less because not as many people who look like you suffer from it.

My siblings and I were raised by an abusive narcissist who spent most of her free time screaming at my dad, when she wasn’t emotionally abusing and neglecting us.

But of course the cultural narrative was that men are only and always abusers, and women are only and always abused - so we normalised it; our whole reality bent around the notion that she was the poor innocent beleagured victim just doing her best to survive.

We took a vast amount of damage because an interpretation where she was the abuser simply wasn’t available to us - instead of forming defenses against her, we rendered ourselves more vulnerable.

I don’t take kindly to being told to go fix women’s problems first before mine will matter.