Tuesday, August 08, 2017
An Australian pro-feminist professor
asked me how I reconciled my “obvious commitment” to ending
domestic violence with my refusal to engage in the research toward
that effect.
My response to that is that research
has gone terribly, tragically wrong.
A woman who is being abused for real is
not going to be in a position to take a survey. And if she does, she
will be under intense pressure to protect her community's reputation
against the “evil liberals” in the government. Which means that
such research will fail to account for real wrongs.
A woman who would take such a research
would be a woman in a socially liberal community. In socially liberal
communities, violence against women is against social norms. Which
means that a man who commits domestic violence in such a community is
a man who violates social norms – who, by definition, possesses a
personality disorder. However that is not where the bulk of violence
against women takes place. A most common abuser is not a “sociopath,”
a “narcissist” or a “borderline.” He is your average Joe,
Igor, Abdul, Praveem or Jamal who thinks that real men dominate
women, or that love is for sissies, or that he owes it to God or to
his gender to beat women down.
What this means therefore is that this
research is wrong. What we see is a completely biased sample. Most
feminist-minded women would not go with real misogynists. They would
go with liberal-minded men who, for the most part, have a good will
toward women. They would decide for one or another reason that the
man does not meet their ridiculous expectations. At which point they
would decide that the man is – an abuser, a misogynist, whatever –
and tell the same thing to an academic who is researching their
situation.
This leads us to the present situation.
We see women on one side of town howling “misogyny” or “abuse”
over nothing. We see women on the other side of town being subjected
to real wrongdoings, and the women on the first side of town think
that they are losers or wimps. The real abuse cases go completely
under the radar. Whereas the people who get detected are for the most
part men who are not real abusers at all.
I want to see sanity brought to this
matter. In both situations we see a very real wrong. On one side of
town, a man goes to jail for “beating up [his] wife's fist with
[his] face.” On the other side of town, a man breaks his wife's
skull so badly that she needs 40 stitches and walks away with full
custody of the child. Neither situation is close to being right.
Now one side accuses me of being a
misogynist, and the other side accuses me of being a feminist. What
this tells me is that I'm somewhere in the middle, and that indeed I
am. I see neither women or men as being better or worse than the
other. My stance is a rational one: That anything capable of choice
can be good, bad, indifferent or a mix. And in situations of beings
who are capable of all sorts of possible outcomes, the solution is
not to side with either. It is to support people on either side who
are willing to do the right thing and oppose people on either side
who are not.
Now one thing that we see claimed by
some in feminism is that love is a patriarchial racket or a form of
misogyny. Once again, they get that perception from a biased sample.
A liberal woman is likely to go for a man who claims to love her. She
is less likely to go for a “traditional” man who believes that a
woman's place is in the kitchen, or for a “rational” man who
thinks that anything with feelings is an inferior form of life. She
may discover unpleasantness in her relationship. However she is much
less likely to do so from a man who has romantic attitudes than from
a man who believes that women belong in the kitchen or from a man who
believes that anything with feelings is an inferior form of life.
So yes, I do in fact refuse to engage
in that research, and for very good reasons. Once again, that
research is wrong. They have not studied women who are being abused
for real. And if they attempted to do so, then such women, once
again, were under intense pressure to hide from the “evil liberals”
in the government what actually went on.
So here it is: A completely reasonable
case against what has been wrongful research. And the outcomes of
this research, once again, have been completely in the wrong. Your
average abuser is not a romantic. Your average abuser is not a
“sociopath,” a “narcissist” or a “borderline.” Your
average abuser is a man who thinks that violence against women is the
right way to go. And until these people confront these real abusers,
they will continue rightfully to lose credibility in society.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home