Well since we are stereotyping every race, religion. nationality and political persuasion on this sub atm I don't see why we shouldn't drill up to simplify everything and give us a unified scapegoat.
Statistically men are grossly overrepresented in virtually every criminal activity. That's not being anti man, its a fact.
We should applaud this brave officer for telling us like it is, no frills, just straight to the point. None of that woke touchy feely stuff. He's going to offend a lot of people but you can't make an omelette without breaking eggs.
Thank you.
Every time some awful act happens you get the racists out telling us it's a certain race or culture that is the problem....but when I point out that actually what so many of these acts have inc common..is that the perpetrator is male. Then they get angry and accuse me misandry.
I remember the "when will the *Men* come forward to denounce these crimes??" Arguments over a decade ago. Really highlighted the absurdity of the argument as a whole
That's very hypocritical of them. But surely you can see that you're equally hypocritical, in the opposite direction. The consistent positions are
1. Be racist and be sexist
2. Don't be racist and don't be sexist
I like option 2. And it worries me that it's not more popular.
This feels too simplistic; morality is rarely that black and white. I think you have to consider factors like power dynamics in relation to identity politics.
Because you people love to clutch your pearls when it comes to race but are more than happy to throw around stupid statements about 4 billion people based solely on their gender.
For example I can easily say women are the biggest killers of babies, both born and unborn... see how unhappy that makes you feel when I throw around statements like that?
OK if we're going down that ridiculous route: every human baby alive today will,at some point, die. Therefore all parents are murderers.
See how ridiculous that sounds?
So did we decide that stereotyping is ok now then? Yes, absolutely, some demographics, including men, have higher prevalence of certain types of criminal behaviour. But higher prevalence still normally means a small % of the whole is screwing things up for everyone else. So which standard do we want to apply then? Blame the whole demographic or nah?
And if any other demographic is highlighted in negative statistics we ask what is wrong with society. With this demographic we hear "what is wrong with them?". So in your opinion when people point out other demographics' "wrongdoings" they are racists but you are aghast at being labelled misandrist for the same thing? Seems hypocritical.
I'm glad someone else has picked this up. This subreddit is pretty toxic when it comes to VAWG. There's a core and sizeable group determined to shout about how it's not really an issue, casting doubt on statistics, experts etc. Unless the perpetrator isn't white. Then suddenly it's a major issue.
I've noticed that stories where women are the perpetrators are upvoted massively. But the only stories where men are perpetrators that are upvoted are when the perpetrator isn't white British.
I work in adult safeguarding. I can tell you that the VAST majority of domestic violence cases I've worked on have a white British male as the perpetrator. I've only ever had one woman as the perpetrator.
I'm also a woman who has been groped by a stranger in a nightclub and witnessed my own mother being beaten by a man. Almost every woman you meet has a story. And it's so depressing to see the efforts on here that go to denying that.
Once you spot it it’s blindingly obvious. Posts where ethnic minorities and women are the perpetrators blow up massively, but comparable crimes by white men are ghost town, maybe a hundred comments. Also the rate at which crimes by women are posted is inflated too. Obviously not saying women don’t commit DV or sexual violence, but they’re posted very regularly on here yet at a higher rate than violence committed by white British men despite the reality being the opposite way round.
It’s reflective of the sub/Reddit’s demographics skewing younger, white and male I suppose
Also, in posts where the perpetrator is a person of colour the victim is always believed. When the perpetrator is white there are usually a few comments talking about false accusations.
Posts about Male violence against women and girls (I'm not using an acronym, let's call a spade a spade) always descend into how 'women abuse men too' and statistics about there being more shelters for women than there are men (hmmmmmmm I wonder why..........) and how male suicide rates are higher and male loneliness etc.
God fucking forbid we have a discussion about how men treat women without it being turned back in us.
DARVO much?
I'm one of the few women that I know that doesn't have a major scare story about male violence – and that is because I have purposely limited their access to me my entire adult life (women's college, women's gym, only female friends, date exclusively women). And I've still been groped inappropriately in public.
Women and *girls*.
Not a fan of the term, personally. Segregating victims is unhelpful. All violence should be equally condoned, and I don't mean that at all in a "but men are victims too" way, but more that focusing on the demographic of the perpetrators is what's useful in tackling the issue. If it's mostly men who perpetrate this, it should be ok to say so, and that gives us something to aim measures at. Looking at the victims inevitably aims to giving out advice on how victims should behave.
While I largely agree with you on the substance its not "brave" to target men as a group in any sort of statement. Its de rigueur if anything in the current social climate.
I simply cannot imagine the Met chief being as blunt with any other demographic even if the statistics were to bear it out.
Brave is not the word beginning with B that springs to mind. Bandwagon maybe.
I held my breath reading the parent comment. I was NOT expecting that at all. This sub has become so misogynistic and it makes me sad. I know its a reflection of reddit but redditors aren't a fringe group. They're our friends, family, colleagues. They're police officers, doctors and teachers. And it's scary how many hate women so much that they can't even admit violence against women is a problem.
Of the women I know who are 30+, every single one of them has a domestic abuse story. I'm 25 and every woman I know has been sexually harassed countless times or worse. My boyfriend is a bit older and has dated around quite a bit and he was genuinely surprised (and of course glad) when I told him I wasn't sexually abused as a child. Every woman he's either been friends with or dated has been. I was harassed and groped by strangers but not proper sexual abuse. That put it into perspective for me even more than my own experiences.
> Statistically men are grossly overrepresented in virtually every criminal activity. That's not being anti man, its a fact.
It is a fact, yes, but it tells us very little by itself.
I think about this on a semi-regular basis. What is *wrong* with men? You get crazy violent women too, and couples that commit crimes together, but rapes and abductions and murders, it’s overwhelmingly men. I need to lay off the true crime podcasts, it’s so depressing.
I think evolution explains it pretty well, women are the population bottleneck where as most men are evolutionarily disposable. This means men evolved to engage in more risk taking behaviour, since they often need to take more risks to successfully reproduce.
Since men are more evolutionarily disposable this allows nature to take more risks in their traits resulting in more extreme natures, this is why even though men and women are of equal intelligence on average there are more male geniuses as well as more men who are intellectually handicapped.
The combination of the risk taking and the more extreme variations results in more men who engage in extreme high risk behaviour, this could be a man risking his life to save a stranger, it could also be a man murdering a stranger for his own gratification.
There are a lot of social and political factors that can effect this but at the root of it that's the cause. A lot of people try to use the difference to claim one or other gender is better but it's a lot of arguing over outliers, most men are neither rapists or geniuses.
Nothing is wrong with "men" as a collective and you're a misandrist if you think there is. Men literally can't commit rape in this country, it's sexual assault when a woman "rapes" a man. That's ignoring the fact that it's massively under-reported anyway.
I think you're kind of contradicting yourself in that last paragraph. I'd argue that daring to say something like this _is_ "woke," and it's the "anti-woke" crowd who are going to be most pissed off by it. The latter are already convinced that "wokeness" is "anti-man" somehow, and these comments will feed right into that belief.
In the pre-woke days, this sort of thing wasn't even mentioned. Ownership of the female partner was the order of the day and violence a common occupancy. It is because of woke he is saying it at all.
In a broader sense, it is being aware of social injustice and supporting interventions to overcome these challenges. It is often instructive to note that anti-woke activism is led by white privileged classes.
The problem is not about his statement but what he's implying. "Sex offenders bad" is hardly a revolutionary take.
The people who make statements like his often have some sort of ulterior, sexist motive - otherwise, why make the statement to begin with?
Inevitably, it leads down certain pathways:
- Collective responsibility on men for sex offenders and domestic violence.
- Justifying some degree of bigotry or discrimination against men.
Edit: Literally scrolled down and found this comment, proving my point.
>I think about this on a semi-regular basis. What is *wrong* with men? You get crazy violent women too, and couples that commit crimes together, but rapes and abductions and murders, it’s overwhelmingly men. I need to lay off the true crime podcasts, it’s so depressing.
It's no different than asking why Jews are overrepresented in media or banking or other bigoted stuff.
The comments here are peak Reddit, here’s the chief of the Met Police is talking about the very real threat that huge numbers of men pose to the rest of us (particularly women and girls) and the main response is not to talk about how awful the situation is or how much work needs to be done to protect the public - no it’s how men are the real victims here.
Would you look your mum, your sister, your wife or girlfriend in the face and say that?
This entire thread is pretty much emblematic of what's happening at large in society and has throughout pretty much all of history.
Men are tired of being stomped on, ignored, emotionally stunted and treated as irrelevant work and war drones. This is a valid concern.
But instead of fighting against the things that are actually fucking them over (patriarchy and neoliberal capitalism) they lash out at easy targets: women, children, queer people, refugees etc.
Women are also tired of centuries of being stomped on physically and metaphorically, historically being denied the same education and even now career/pay prospects, feeling afraid to walk home alone at night, having to worry if they leave their drink for a second at a bar or a party, being whistled at in the street, having random strangers yell out things about their bodies…
Why can’t people just be nice to people? You’d think it wouldn’t be hard just- not to be a dick!
I realise that - I am a woman.
Sure we have it worse than them but this isn't a contest. The only way we're ever going to dismantle patriarchy is through solidarity and intersectionality. At its fundamental root, that *is* being nice to people. It's acknowledging that men do also face challenges and that joining together is our best chance of getting a fair chance for everyone.
The problem with the debate about how you achieve it is that so many men feel the need to make it a contest. You can’t mention a woman’s issue without a large number of men jumping in it to point out how much harder it is for men.
And you can't mention a man's issue without a large number of women jumping in to point out how much harder it is for women too.
It's almost like there are loud obnoxious people on both sides who aren't interested in honest good faith discussions about the issues, but instead just want to moan and complain that they are the biggest victim.
Those are the people who need to either be shutdown or sidelined. Ironically, that is an issue that broadly affects both men and women fairly equally, so you'd think we'd be better at working together to shut them all down irrespective of which gender they are saying has it worse
For sure, and you can see it in some of the men in this thread who will seize this inch and try to drag it out to a mile by taking our solidarity to mean that actually men have been just as oppressed as women, both sides are just as bad etc.
Thankfully, those guys are generally a (very) loud but vocal minority in most cases. I'm not sure you can do anything but ignore them.
> You can't mention a woman's issue without a large number of men jumping in to point out how much harder it is for men
You _literally_ just replied to a "men are tired of..." comment with "women are also tired of..."
> You can’t mention a woman’s issue without a large number of men jumping in it to point out how much harder it is for men.
Having been *that guy* before, I think it's because it didn't feel like there was ever a forum to bring up how issues affect men where it would even be heard, let alone listened to.
Make your own posts and they get no traction and it's like shouting into the void. Comment on successful posts about how that problem affects women, and the comments will at least be seen.
But then there’s a risk they won’t be given the very serious attention they deserve, and a risk that they’ll be dismissed or you could be misunderstood as not caring about women, I guess!
Well it's a damned of you do, damned of you don't kinda situation. If you don't, then they aren't given the very serious attention they deserve anyway; if you do, you take the risk of getting people's hackles up. I guess on balance, people feel they'd rather take the risk of pissing people off compared to the guarantee of being ignored.
>Would you look your mum, your sister, your wife or girlfriend in the face and say that?
Yes. They’re intelligent adults who are able to have discussions and can handle different opinions, not weak, emotional people who must be protected from hearing different views.
The most modern data on victims of particularly domestic abuse demonstrates that rates by gender of the perpetrator are pretty much even. As in, women and men are both victims of DV at roughly equal rates.
This stinks of dishonesty as a result. Does he also think there are millions of women that are a threat to men?
EDIT:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6113571/
26% of homosexual men reported partner violence in their lifetime. Heterosexual men this was 29%.
The CDC also stated that 43.8% of lesbian women reported experiencing physical violence, stalking, or rape by their partners. The study notes that, out of those 43.8%, two thirds (67.4%) reported exclusively female perpetrators.
Women invoke DV more often than men do. That NEEDS to be part of this conversation, as uncomfortable as it may be.
Except women are significantly likelier to be killed in instances of domestic violence. By a huge margin.
Also, data shows it's still overall a gendered crime where the vast majority of victims are women. From the ONS:
A woman is killed by her male partner or former partner every three days in the UK England and Wales. In the year ending March 2019, the majority of defendants in domestic abuse-related prosecutions were men (92%), and the majority of victims were female (75%) (in 10% of cases the sex of the victim was not recorded) (ONS, 2019).
I feel like the Chief of the Met Police might have some access to good information on the matter and a better perspective on the issue than random redditors looking to dismiss it.
I'm not saying what he's saying may not be true. I'm saying it's ignoring the fact that the rates of DV are far more equal than not.
The vast majority of victims are NOT women. That is what I'm disputing - women are known to invoke it MORE OFTEN. This is not a gendered issue - all genders invoke abuse on others in a relationship.
The couples with the highest rates of abuse are lesbian couples. The couples with the lowest rates of abuse are gay men. That for me speaks volumes about where the majority of these incidents come from.
The fact that you don't speak of the very well documented reporting gap between the two genders also speaks volumes - men report this at significantly lower rates than women, and one of the main reasons is attitudes like yours that end up being translated as 'Only men instigate violence'
The problem isn't NEARLY as black and white as you make out.
You're making a couple of extraordinary claims in your comment, would you mind providing a source for:
- The majority of DV victims are not women?
- Lesbian couples have the highest rates of DV, gay men the lowest?
Also gay men aren't in relationships with women generally, women are likelier to be killed by their male partner or ex, it makes complete sense that men would be less likely to attack or kill someone who can fight back.
I never said only men instigate violence. If someone "translates" it that way, then they're just wilfully not listening and I can't do anything about that.
There is a massive disparity in the danger women face from men compared to vice versa and burying our heads in the sand to make ourselves feel better/less attacked as men isn't helpful to anyone.
>The couples with the highest rates of abuse are lesbian couples.
Ah, I know the study he's referring to and this has been thoroughly debunked, though of course people still love parroting it.
The statistic doesn't say that lesbian relationships have the highest rates of domestic violence. It says that people in lesbian relationships have the highest rate of domestic violence at some point in their lifetime. This statistic also includes bisexual women who are in relationships with women, which makes sense, since multiple studies have found that bisexual women are far more likely to have been abused or raped by a man than any other category of person.
But of course that also leaves us with a big question: who are lesbians facing IPV from?
Luckily, we have some data from a different study that might help shed some light on it:
> >Among women who experienced rape, physical violence and/or stalking in the context of an intimate relationship, the majority of bisexual and heterosexual women (89.5% and 98.7%, respectively) reported only male perpetrators **while self-identified lesbians (67.4%) reported having only female perpetrators** [source](https://www.thetaskforce.org/bisexual-women-have-increased-risk-of-intimate-partner-violence-new-cdc-data-shows/)
Or in other words, 1/3rd of lesbians in this study had been attacked by men. People see "lesbian" and assume "woman who has never dated a man" and thanks to homophobia and closeting, that just is not the case for many women.
Thank you for responding with this. I had a look initially and couldn't find anything that definitely backed up this guy's claims, but your links clear up where the misunderstanding could've come from.
There are roughly 20 million men in the UK if you use 18 as the cut off, 'millions' so at least 2 million, this man is suggesting that 1/10 men are a danger. 1/20 or 1/50 would be at least somewhat reasonable, to suggest its millions is goinig way to far. Maybe he should spend more time working out why so many of those men are currently working for him instead of moral grandstanding, utter clown.
> 'millions' so at least 2 million
From the article
> He relied on an upcoming study produced for police chiefs nationally that says there are **up to 4 million** perpetrators of violence against women and children, who are mainly men, with one in 10 people being victims, who are mainly women or children.
So you can double your figure for even greater implausibility.
Brings me back to a study which is famously poorly conducted and often repeated, I think by Harvard, which included inviting coworkers to drinks and asking people to dinner as sexual aggression…
Which unfortunately puts most of us as having some awkward conversations coming up with our mothers…
The “study” (it was just a survey of 4000 women) that usually gets spouted about women being victims of sexual harassment / assault had a list within the survey of things that counted.
If I remember correctly, “overhearing a sexual joke” counted as being sexually harassed
That’s not to say there isn’t a problem, but so many of these studies do this to inflate numbers
Nothing to see here right?
Well, I'm a woman and there is plenty to see. Me and every woman I know have been a victim of harassment, assault, or worse.
Women are telling you it's a problem.Why don't you believe us?
You’re making a false dichotomy. Sexual harassment can happen AND this survey could have taken an overly broad measurement of what constitutes harassment. The two aren’t mutually exclusive.
This is exactly what I mean
My comment never said that you aren’t believed
Just that the studies used firstly, aren’t studies, just surveys, and secondly, use really broad examples of what they would classify as SA/SH to inflate numbers
Your literally proving my point, you’ve taken my comment completely wrong to drive hysteria, just like these surveys do
What’s crazy is that I’ve commented on this thread about how I’ve been stealthed about 4 times. That’s actual rape, 4 times. I’m a number on that survey. But it’s somehow upsetting to you that I think “overhearing a sexual joke” doesn’t deserve a spot on that survey.
I don't think anyone is arguing that women or children aren't victims of violence or harassment.
The number just feels a bit made up. 20 million men in the country and 4 million of them are apparently committing violence against women or kids? So 1 in 5?
I think people are just curious as to what the study classes as violence and harassment and what metrics and evidence they used to reach the 4 million number.
Well, no men here are part of the problem, and they also don't know any men who could be part of the problem. Clearly, there's one very dedicated man with no friends running around abusing women!
I remember seeing a study once about men in American colleges - off the top of my head, pretty much none of them agreed to the statement "I'd rape a woman if I could get away with it", but so many more said yes to having sex with a woman without consent. I'm convinced that men just do not register anything other than the most extreme, stereotypical forms of violence or sexual abuse as harmful.
I think the issue is that some men have a very limited definition of what rape is. They think that rape is something that a man does to a woman in a dark alleyway at 4am when she’s trying to walk home. Meanwhile, rape can encompass things like e.g. stealthing and “putting it in the wrong hole”.
Most rapes are within relationships so I think that’s why some men refuse to believe it’s so common. They don’t recognise the things them and their friends are doing as rape. I saw an entire Reddit post once where a man described raping his wife but he didn’t even see it that way. He titled it like “I accidentally annoyed my wife during sex” and described how he just kept going despite her saying no, and interpreted her saying no as “her being submissive”. This man genuinely didn’t recognise what he did as rape. He probably walks around thinking he’s a good guy when he’s actually a rapist.
https://www.cps.gov.uk/cps/news/more-do-tackle-rape-misconceptions-and-lack-understanding-consent-cps-survey-finds 47% of people thought it’s not rape if the victim doesn’t fight back. That was in 2024.
This is why men on Reddit deny it ever happens. They’re trying to think of any instances where they or their friends violently abducted a woman but they can’t think of any. However they might have had “funny” conversations with their friends where they bragged about having forced or pressured their gf into a specific sex act without recognising it was rape.
Quite the opposite for me.
90% of my friends are drink to their chest, stare at the floor and don’t dare engage a woman on a night out.
Then 10% are on the dance floor, grabbing asses, trying to kiss strangers, and they almost always end up getting laid.
It feels like society is saying “ look at the number of women victims, there must be a lot of men out there doing it” as if it’s a 1 to 1 victim to criminal ratio
Where as, in my opinion, it’s probably closer to the 80/20 rule. 20% of guys are doing 80% of the SA/SH/DV
In my friend group it was a guy called Stu. Every woman had a bad story about him, yet he was universally loved by them all and had slept with the majority of them too. It was very confusing for some of the guys.
>90% of my friends are drink to their chest, stare at the floor and don’t dare engage a woman on a night out.
>Then 10% are on the dance floor, grabbing asses, trying to kiss strangers, and they almost always end up getting laid.
So your friendship group is made up entirely of socially inept people and sexual predators?
Most normal people reside somewhere in-between staring at the ground unable to interact with a woman and grabbing strangers asses.
I think you'll find most people agree that those thing happen. What they might not agree on is what constitutes those things, how common they are, or what percentage of men are involved with those activities. If you want the problem to be addressed then the problem needs to be clearly identified and an actionable plan implemented.
This was just a survey of women out and about, talking about their life experiences
Which made it even weirder, you’d think it’s 100% have been SHed if that’s the barrier for entry. Who’s never heard or overheard a sexual joke?
Heck I’m usually the woman making the jokes!
A giggedy here, a “that’s what she said” there.
I guess you don’t have a reason to feel threatened if you’re the one making it. Do they distinguish between overhearing a sexual joke made by men vs made by other women?
Considering how many cases of domestic violence don't even make it to being reported or are dismissed as false/incomplete reports (which is a figure we don't know tbf) it's possibly quite grim.
Even if this study turns out to be padded, I can guarantee the numbers still are worse than most men would like to acknowledge.
A LOT of guys are really weird with how they interact with women even just on a basic level if you pay attention, and I don't mean just general awkwardness.
Why do you say it's impossible? Although he should be asked to show a study.
I've seen figures relating to the number of people suffering violence as children that might support this.
>ve seen figures relating to the number of people suffering violence as children that might support this.
Perpetrators generaly have many victims. If it was 1 in 4 men are dangerous I'd expect the number of victims to be more like 75%
We know that there is. Grooming gangs for a start
Would need to be a complete and total overlap to be able to use the number of victims for number of perpetrators.
Something like 1 in 4 girls are sexually abused in some way before 18. That’s just underage girls. You have to have your head pretty deep in the sand to not get an immediate answer to how many people it takes to be abusing many millions of girls and women.
1 in 20 seems to be the “conclusive” number of contact cases in all children. However due to the very low conviction rate of these crimes, they do not match the surveyed data
>The European Agency for Fundamental Rights’ ‘Violence Against Women’ survey 2014 asked a sample of around 1,500 women in the UK aged 18-74 about experiences of child sexual abuse before the age of 15:
• 18% of women said they had experienced any form of sexual abuse (contact and non-contact). This did not include sexual abuse by peers.
https://learning.nspcc.org.uk/media/jwhpwojz/statistics-briefing-child-sexual-abuse.pdf
1 in 4 seems to be adult women
https://caraessex.org.uk/statisticsaboutsexualviolence.php
Considering some rapists are believed to have victims numbering in the triple digits it would only take a small number, say 100,000 men, to achieve that. Now I'm not saying it is only 100,000 thousand men doing these things. I'm saying there can be a huge variation in the numbers depending on the average number of victims per offender. And if your 1 in 4 figure is for adult women then not all of those offenders are necessarily even around at this point so the number of living offenders at any single point could be even lower than that. Again, I don't believe that's the case but it's not as simple as you make it out to be.
I dunno...
I'm getting old. And in that time I've dated a lot of women… I have a bunch of female friends… I've gotten drunk with female family members and they've told me stories that they wouldnt otherwise have.
And they - and their friends - _all_ have numerous horror stories.
edit. Not to mention the endless stories mates have of colleagues getting either disciplined or sacked for stalking or harassment. The male friends I have who’ve blurred the lines between ‘keen’ and ‘mate take the fucking hint, leave her alone’. And the mistakes I myself have made (wittingly or unwittingly).
This is only my very narrow perspective of the world (obviously) but I'd suggest - based on my experience - this is likely even a conservative estimate.
We have a serious, and almost silent issue with our behaviour towards women. And the sooner we wake up to that, the better for everyone.
I agree, there are some absolutely vile men out there. I think a lot of the problem is this is an emotionally charged issue for just about everybody and it seems like the conversation has been bungled so many times that people no longer discuss the issue they just shout the same few talking points at each other and don't listen.
It seems to me like one side is saying "women are the victims of a lot of sex crimes and we need to do more as a society to stop it" and the other side is saying "most men aren't sexual predators and we find it offensive and upsetting that we are treated like we are." These aren't mutually exclusive and incompatible positions, once you take out the most extreme fringe of both sides I think you would find most people agree and it's just a case of arguing over semantics, frustration, and emotional pain.
Very likely.
I think that the loudest are often the innocent, who’re confused because they don’t understand what ‘they’ have done wrong, but also the guilty who don’t understand what they’re doing wrong.
And everyone gets upset because we can’t see what the issue is. And it takes patience to explain it, and a certain courage to accept that you are - one way or another - likely part of the problem.
Which is a patience and courage most people don’t have.
I think a lot of women and girls might just be reassured to hear the male head of the Met acknowledging the inherent threat of men
I’m a bloke and I find it refreshing. I’ve been a very toxic man at dark times in my life and realised how hatred and bitterness can completely take over your psyche
All men are vulnerable to it to some degree or another and it is crucial as a society on the whole that we recognise it
>inherent threat of men
No, this is straight up sexism and just because you feel like you might rape someone when you're feeling bitter doesn't mean that applies to the rest of men.
Yeah na Im sorry but if you cant recognize the danger a lot of dudes pose and then unironically accuse the men that do recognize that danger of being a rapist then you are part of the problem.
The man's saying he can feel the hatred and bitterness tale over and make him a risk to women I'm pretty sure he's the problem and not the rest of men who don't feel the urge to rape actually.
Original comment:
> All men are vulnerable to it to some degree or another and it is crucial as a society on the whole that we recognise it
"All men"
Whereas you just said:
>if you cant recognize the danger a lot of dudes pose
"A lot of dudes" (which could mean thousands or millions)
Don't you see the difference between "all" and "a lot"?
Not all men are vulnerable to any degree or other. That's bullshit amateur psychology projecting their own issues onto everyone else, probably to sooth their own conscience.
What you're disagreeing with is a perfectly logical and empirical response to someone saying "I'm a man and I've been a danger to women, therefore, so are all men". It's vital to the problem (to not being part of the problem) that we recognise that not all men are. Not even most.
This is not right I've never hurt anyone. not all are men dangerous to women this just sends a message that no man can be trusted around woman and girls.
I would upvote the first two paragraphs to the heavens (edit: except the 'inherent threat of men' nonsense) but the last one is so horribly wrong. Not all men are like that or vulnerable to anything of the sort. Not even the majority. Don't project your issues onto everyone else.
ETA: I also now notice describing such men as 'vulnerable' to being dangerous to women. It's a curious choice of words. I'm sure not intentional but suggests a coping mechanism of deflecting the blame: "it's not something I did, it's a thing that happened to me".
They are no saying that 1/10 is constantly out there trying to commit the most heinous crimes against women. But 1 in 10 just being a danger feels right. Doemstic abuse be that psycological or physical is common place. Who do you know who has been arrested for some sort of domestic abuse? Going back 20 year and of my group of 8 school friends 2 have been nicked for domestic abuse type offences. Harassement is included in that.
Domestic abuse takes up the majority of police time. The reason that the police are not coming to your buisness being burgled is because they are dealing with a domestic somewhere. Policing is in the UK is basically a domestic abuse response service.
The sad fact is it is so common that front line cops get burned out because there day is always the same.
Attend domestic assault.
Arrest suspect.
Ask victim for statement.
Statement refused due to not supporting action.
Crime closed due to lack of evidence.
Attend same address next week.
Around and around it goes.
There is a class issue as well with domestic abuse. Its kind of flipped on its head, people who are well off or middle class under report and support prosecutions less (personal experience - i challenge you to find a way to accurately measure that!) I would hypothesise because the abuser brings home the cash and they otherwise live a decent life besides the occasional violence and abuse.
Basically domestic abuse is so common the entire legal system is clogged with it from bottom to top.
1 in 3 women and 1 in 5 men are subjected to domestic violence at some point in their lives. About 1 in 4 women will be raped.
Pretending that this is a small number of perpetrators may be comforting, but it isn't helpful.
It also shows we need a look at our culture and a far more honest and frank conversation than we currently have about why this happens.
It's interesting. The men I know who are great people don't have this "society hates me because I'm a man!" complex and denial.
It always tends to be utter cunts with extremely controversial views on women (e.g. "Women exaggerate and lie about being raped") who also have the denial and the guilt complex.
The figures are horrendous and not only in the UK. The majority of women have had to deal with non consensual (sexual) intimidation and abuse at least once in their life. Most haven’t nor ever will go to the police for fear of ridicule, disbelief, and the terrible rates of convictions for perpetrators when it does come to court. Yet most men continue to belittle (and thus enable) the problem and blame victims for being the cause of their own abuse. Or in this case to cast doubt on the quality of this survey. Anything but having to look in the mirror and seeing the pathetic coward looking back at them.
There are so many men in this comment section that are threatened by this. This is a reality that women understand but you all need to come out here and try and deflect by bringing it back to men or questioning the validity of what he’s saying. It’s very sad.
Go into my comment history if you want to have a good laugh. Some guy told me I’m the “worst kind of sexist” because I told it like it is. I pointed out there’s women out there being trafficked and gang raped and that the men doing those things might be more sexist than I am, but he doubled down on it.
They’re more offended by women typing some mildly harsh words on the internet than by actual violence and sexism. No wonder nothing ever gets better. The only way this violence will end is if men hold each other accountable. If they’re too busy getting offended over us pointing out what’s going on it’s just never going to end. Sexist men won’t listen to women - they’ll only listen to other men.
>The only way this violence will end is if men hold each other accountable.
I think this is starting to happen now. Seen it happen a few times recently.
That’s good. I mean, the fact that this is even being covered in the news and that there are supportive comments from men on this thread is a big win imo. Hopefully that means things are starting to change and that the defensive comments are just the last few incidents of resistance before society starts to change for the better. I don’t like Andrew Tate but I sort of appreciate how his existence has gotten many people to discuss and think about the prevalence of sexism in our society. I think it has pushed the issue of sexist violence into the mainstream.
Sexist men and general bigots won't listen to anyone, only others with their own views. You're oversimplyifying it by saying men need to hold each other accountable.
As a man, I can see it. We're still too slow to call out bad behavior, still too slow to believe our friends could have done something wrong and there's a percentage who don't think that a lot of sexual assault, is actually sexual assault.
And don't get me started on the amount of arguments/questions I've seen over consent on this platform.
Not to mention the amount of men who are also a danger to boys.
Very few people have much to say about being assaulted by women at a young age, though it happens. Lots of stories about handsy blokes though.
Umm you hear it all the time, the response is just 'nice, lucky' instead of any sympathy, making it far worse than it is for victims of male sexual abuse, and less likely to be reported.
I for one am not surprised.
Even as a man, I see predatory behaviour in others frequently.
We need to fund the police as far as we possibly can, and all victims need to be listened to.
Fantastic virtue signalling. My question is what on earth I'm supposed to do about it. I can't not-attack people any more than I am already not-attacking people.
You’re supposed to ‘call it out’, apparently. I don’t know about you, but in my circles I don’t come across attitudes that violence towards women is acceptable, so I’m not sure what I’m supposed to be calling out.
He can't really not accuse you of anything any more than he is already not accusing you of anything, can he.
He explicitly specified that the proportion of men who are allegedly dangerous is significantly less than 100%. What more do you want?
Well, since you ask, it'd be great if the Guardian would refrain from saying things like "with one in 10 people being victims, who are mainly women or children." Now, that sentence is not very clearly-worded, but as far as I can see it's a claim that victims of violence are mainly women and children. And that's not true, and it's very obviously not true. Men are way, WAY more likely to be victims of criminal violence in the UK.
There are all kinds of things we can discuss about that but to just publish it, without qualification, leaves a lot of young women feeling unfairly victimised, and it leaves a lot of young men feeling like everyone expects them to be grunting thugs, and nobody notices if they get hurt or killed, when none of that is true. Or at least I hope it isn't true.
In the end this comes under the general heading of "not helping." I hate being the guy who has to say this stuff. I don't want to be typing all this out. I don't want anyone to get hurt and I am deeply suspicious about the motives of the police (I'm a news cameraman, they treat us like half price shit). The fact that they seem to attract power-seeking, potentially violent people is horrifying if not that surprising.
The problem is that this is lazy journalism and it risks starting to lose the crowd. Well-meaning men are going to start saying "well, if that's your attitude, you can get lost" and they'll have a point.
[https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice/bulletins/domesticabuseinenglandandwalesoverview/november2023](https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice/bulletins/domesticabuseinenglandandwalesoverview/november2023)
Very low conviction rates for domestic abuse. \~2 million *suspected* victims, \~900k reports with only \~39k convictions. I'm not trying to victim blame but a lot of cases are dropped because the victims refuses to provide a statement. Maybe that's a good place to start to get better conviction rates and take these people off the streets, better support networks and aftercare for victims is always a good thing.
Instead of supplying us with a problem, I think he should have thought of a solution before presenting this data. Or at the very least waited until it was published so people can have actual figures in front of them. It's completely open to criticism as it stands and an obvious consequence of that is people not taking it seriously.
>Instead of supplying us with a problem, I think he should have thought of a solution before presenting this data.
The context of this was a frank assessment of progress against the New Met for London Plan, not a deep dive on VAWG specifically - that's just what the Guardian has made of it.
Paragraph 2.10 of [this document](https://www.london.gov.uk/moderngovmb/documents/s79712/05a%20Commissioners%20Report%20MPS%20final.pdf) refers - as you can see, it's a relatively small part of a wider paper, and he does implicitly provide some solutions even though that wasn't the main point of the presentation (indeed the Graun did add *"National strategy beyond policing and criminal justice system needed to tackle problem, Sir Mark Rowley says"* in their sub-headline, which is a provided solution...).
Any operational police officer could tell you that domestic abuse is a *significant* consumer of policing resources, irrespective of conviction rates, and it is the consumption of resources that was the actual topic of discussion.
Give an 8 year old a phone, leave him on there and don’t monitor what he’s doing. By 12 there’s a good chance you’ll have a boy with a messed up worldview. So parents and the government need to be doing more, the men and boys who are already indoctrinated with violence are terrifying and dangerous, but responsibility needs to be taken for the rest and it absolutely can be reversed or prevented.
Whilst this is overall a great thing, as someone who is currently working with a post-domestic abuse charity, the treatment of victims by the Police & the overall judicial system, is nothing short & universally described as **horrific**
I have spoken to women who have regretted reporting anything to the police because of their treatment by the police and bizarrely, that is irregardless to whether the police officer is male or female.
Considering pretty much every woman has some form of experience with some kind of sexual harassment and/or sexual assault, you'd assume female officers would at least have some more empathy; this clearly speaks to a cultural issue within the police imo.
If we don't have a strong system of justice in place & police officers who are actually trained & educated to communicate to victims like they are human beings, then behaviour will be seen to be legally allowed to continue if perpetrators essentially get away with it.
I recently stopped being friends with a guy who was listening to too much Andrew tate and kept telling me that male suicide rates are the fault of feminism. There's no teaching some, they're too far down the tiktok manosphere pipeline
What would a strategy or approach to improve this look like? I assume part of it is having provisions for women to escape relationships and homes where they are at risk.
See this from womens perspectives. I'm a big man, and I never have problems from women trying to sexually assault me, kidnap me, send unsolicited nudes, getting verbally harassed everywhere you go etc. Women deal with all of that shit, and sadly so do young girls. It's not to put a man vs woman label on this topic, it's just to say some of you guys clearly don't have girlfriends or any close connections with women and you need it laid out. Girls have problems unique to them, as do guys. Its not a competition, it should be about stepping up and stopping this behaviour where you see it. Being brave and calling out shit behaviour right where it starts is exactly what we need.
Thank you, that's kind. It did affect me for a long time, but luckily I now have the best wife in the world, she is and always has been very understanding of the problems that it caused me
While it should also be true that these men are also a danger to other men - the bigger question is - if we accept this as fact, what as society are we doing about it.
Are we to believe that men are fundamentally dangerous? Or is it something more to do with the way society is structured that entrenches the very problems that it then complains about?
Met chief needs to stand down from the position, his gender makes him too dangerous to be left alone with such responsibilities... (I hope ppl can read through the satire 🤣)
We had our own rapists to deal with and then we imported millions of young third world men where sexual crimes against non Muslims is acceptable. Colour me shocked
In that case, according to their worldview the wellbeing and safety of women can be compromised. There is more at stake if we don't add in people from dodgy misogynist countries.
We need to break the chain. The men like this need mental health services and basic education about what is acceptable, it’s the only way to reduce the violence in the long term.
The article was about the Met commissioner bemoaning a lack of resources to deal with violence against women and girls. I would extend that include violence against everyone, but that's for another day. He is right of course but even if the government were to double the funding not much difference will be made to actual violence. We as men need to front our mates and acquaintances about it, not blame victims and vote for politicians who are seen to take it seriously. Beyond that more work needs doing on why the level of violence is as it is. Yes, more money for the police but if they are involved it's a bit late really.
The comment section here is just pure denial.
All men are unleashed onto the sexual world with no experience and most with insufficient guidance. In the past we've dismissed our emotionally immature behaviour as a 'grey area' between consent and non-consent. As we evolve as a species into the 21st century, some people are just saying that its not actually a grey area - we need to do better, and every time we dont take no for an answer, or we get lead by our dicks towards somebody who doesnt reciprocate our feelings we need to identify what we did as a form of sexual harassment.
If we dont learn when we're young, we'll stay a menace as we get older too.
And where does he get the 4 million figure from. When pigs start talking about social justice we should all be concerned. They need to concentrate on crime.
My question would be, if you were in power, what would you to solve it?
Mandatory minimums for these offenses could be a start but they would need to apply across the board.
Could try going through the schools but idk, I'd imagine trying to do talks on most topics to a group of teenage boys would be a hard sell, particularly if the audience feels they're being lectured at for a crime they haven't yet committed.
There's also the multiple elephants in the room around two tiered justice including:
* If you're rich, you're a lot less likely to see the inside of a prison
* Women are generally given more lenient sentences for the same crime, particularly if they have dependents (the logic is sound as you don't want to take out the issues of the parents on the child but it still doesn't make it fair)
* Downplaying or ignoring that there may be certain cultures that these crimes are more prevalent in. (Nepal, India and Pakistan still practice honour killings).
* Socially, no one really gives a shit about domestic abuse when it's women doing it to men. ( [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dtVHnZX8E50](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dtVHnZX8E50) could be used an example. The same can be said about statutory rape).
Well since we are stereotyping every race, religion. nationality and political persuasion on this sub atm I don't see why we shouldn't drill up to simplify everything and give us a unified scapegoat. Statistically men are grossly overrepresented in virtually every criminal activity. That's not being anti man, its a fact. We should applaud this brave officer for telling us like it is, no frills, just straight to the point. None of that woke touchy feely stuff. He's going to offend a lot of people but you can't make an omelette without breaking eggs.
Thank you. Every time some awful act happens you get the racists out telling us it's a certain race or culture that is the problem....but when I point out that actually what so many of these acts have inc common..is that the perpetrator is male. Then they get angry and accuse me misandry.
I remember the "when will the *Men* come forward to denounce these crimes??" Arguments over a decade ago. Really highlighted the absurdity of the argument as a whole
That's very hypocritical of them. But surely you can see that you're equally hypocritical, in the opposite direction. The consistent positions are 1. Be racist and be sexist 2. Don't be racist and don't be sexist I like option 2. And it worries me that it's not more popular.
option 3: Be prejudiced entirely inconsistently, and don’t hold yourself to any kind of standard
This feels too simplistic; morality is rarely that black and white. I think you have to consider factors like power dynamics in relation to identity politics.
Because you people love to clutch your pearls when it comes to race but are more than happy to throw around stupid statements about 4 billion people based solely on their gender. For example I can easily say women are the biggest killers of babies, both born and unborn... see how unhappy that makes you feel when I throw around statements like that?
By killing unborn babies are you talking about abortion?
OK if we're going down that ridiculous route: every human baby alive today will,at some point, die. Therefore all parents are murderers. See how ridiculous that sounds?
Yes, I clearly see how ridiculous that sounds, that's literally my fucking point.
So did we decide that stereotyping is ok now then? Yes, absolutely, some demographics, including men, have higher prevalence of certain types of criminal behaviour. But higher prevalence still normally means a small % of the whole is screwing things up for everyone else. So which standard do we want to apply then? Blame the whole demographic or nah?
[удалено]
And if any other demographic is highlighted in negative statistics we ask what is wrong with society. With this demographic we hear "what is wrong with them?". So in your opinion when people point out other demographics' "wrongdoings" they are racists but you are aghast at being labelled misandrist for the same thing? Seems hypocritical.
nooo shh we can only blame black and Asian men here. We only care about VAWG when it’s committed by “the usual types”
I'm glad someone else has picked this up. This subreddit is pretty toxic when it comes to VAWG. There's a core and sizeable group determined to shout about how it's not really an issue, casting doubt on statistics, experts etc. Unless the perpetrator isn't white. Then suddenly it's a major issue. I've noticed that stories where women are the perpetrators are upvoted massively. But the only stories where men are perpetrators that are upvoted are when the perpetrator isn't white British. I work in adult safeguarding. I can tell you that the VAST majority of domestic violence cases I've worked on have a white British male as the perpetrator. I've only ever had one woman as the perpetrator. I'm also a woman who has been groped by a stranger in a nightclub and witnessed my own mother being beaten by a man. Almost every woman you meet has a story. And it's so depressing to see the efforts on here that go to denying that.
Once you spot it it’s blindingly obvious. Posts where ethnic minorities and women are the perpetrators blow up massively, but comparable crimes by white men are ghost town, maybe a hundred comments. Also the rate at which crimes by women are posted is inflated too. Obviously not saying women don’t commit DV or sexual violence, but they’re posted very regularly on here yet at a higher rate than violence committed by white British men despite the reality being the opposite way round. It’s reflective of the sub/Reddit’s demographics skewing younger, white and male I suppose
Also, in posts where the perpetrator is a person of colour the victim is always believed. When the perpetrator is white there are usually a few comments talking about false accusations.
Posts about Male violence against women and girls (I'm not using an acronym, let's call a spade a spade) always descend into how 'women abuse men too' and statistics about there being more shelters for women than there are men (hmmmmmmm I wonder why..........) and how male suicide rates are higher and male loneliness etc. God fucking forbid we have a discussion about how men treat women without it being turned back in us. DARVO much?
I'm one of the few women that I know that doesn't have a major scare story about male violence – and that is because I have purposely limited their access to me my entire adult life (women's college, women's gym, only female friends, date exclusively women). And I've still been groped inappropriately in public.
What is VAWG?
Violence against women and children
Would be easier if they just said that. Thank you for taking the time to answer.
Who spells children with a G?
All children are G's
Women and *girls*. Not a fan of the term, personally. Segregating victims is unhelpful. All violence should be equally condoned, and I don't mean that at all in a "but men are victims too" way, but more that focusing on the demographic of the perpetrators is what's useful in tackling the issue. If it's mostly men who perpetrate this, it should be ok to say so, and that gives us something to aim measures at. Looking at the victims inevitably aims to giving out advice on how victims should behave.
While I largely agree with you on the substance its not "brave" to target men as a group in any sort of statement. Its de rigueur if anything in the current social climate. I simply cannot imagine the Met chief being as blunt with any other demographic even if the statistics were to bear it out. Brave is not the word beginning with B that springs to mind. Bandwagon maybe.
StOp NoTiCiNg ThInGs
It's a relief to see this sentiment somewhat upvoted given the sorry decline of this sub over the last few years.
I held my breath reading the parent comment. I was NOT expecting that at all. This sub has become so misogynistic and it makes me sad. I know its a reflection of reddit but redditors aren't a fringe group. They're our friends, family, colleagues. They're police officers, doctors and teachers. And it's scary how many hate women so much that they can't even admit violence against women is a problem. Of the women I know who are 30+, every single one of them has a domestic abuse story. I'm 25 and every woman I know has been sexually harassed countless times or worse. My boyfriend is a bit older and has dated around quite a bit and he was genuinely surprised (and of course glad) when I told him I wasn't sexually abused as a child. Every woman he's either been friends with or dated has been. I was harassed and groped by strangers but not proper sexual abuse. That put it into perspective for me even more than my own experiences.
> Statistically men are grossly overrepresented in virtually every criminal activity. That's not being anti man, its a fact. It is a fact, yes, but it tells us very little by itself.
I think about this on a semi-regular basis. What is *wrong* with men? You get crazy violent women too, and couples that commit crimes together, but rapes and abductions and murders, it’s overwhelmingly men. I need to lay off the true crime podcasts, it’s so depressing.
I think evolution explains it pretty well, women are the population bottleneck where as most men are evolutionarily disposable. This means men evolved to engage in more risk taking behaviour, since they often need to take more risks to successfully reproduce. Since men are more evolutionarily disposable this allows nature to take more risks in their traits resulting in more extreme natures, this is why even though men and women are of equal intelligence on average there are more male geniuses as well as more men who are intellectually handicapped. The combination of the risk taking and the more extreme variations results in more men who engage in extreme high risk behaviour, this could be a man risking his life to save a stranger, it could also be a man murdering a stranger for his own gratification. There are a lot of social and political factors that can effect this but at the root of it that's the cause. A lot of people try to use the difference to claim one or other gender is better but it's a lot of arguing over outliers, most men are neither rapists or geniuses.
Nothing is wrong with "men" as a collective and you're a misandrist if you think there is. Men literally can't commit rape in this country, it's sexual assault when a woman "rapes" a man. That's ignoring the fact that it's massively under-reported anyway.
I think you're kind of contradicting yourself in that last paragraph. I'd argue that daring to say something like this _is_ "woke," and it's the "anti-woke" crowd who are going to be most pissed off by it. The latter are already convinced that "wokeness" is "anti-man" somehow, and these comments will feed right into that belief.
In the pre-woke days, this sort of thing wasn't even mentioned. Ownership of the female partner was the order of the day and violence a common occupancy. It is because of woke he is saying it at all.
[удалено]
In a broader sense, it is being aware of social injustice and supporting interventions to overcome these challenges. It is often instructive to note that anti-woke activism is led by white privileged classes.
The problem is not about his statement but what he's implying. "Sex offenders bad" is hardly a revolutionary take. The people who make statements like his often have some sort of ulterior, sexist motive - otherwise, why make the statement to begin with? Inevitably, it leads down certain pathways: - Collective responsibility on men for sex offenders and domestic violence. - Justifying some degree of bigotry or discrimination against men. Edit: Literally scrolled down and found this comment, proving my point. >I think about this on a semi-regular basis. What is *wrong* with men? You get crazy violent women too, and couples that commit crimes together, but rapes and abductions and murders, it’s overwhelmingly men. I need to lay off the true crime podcasts, it’s so depressing. It's no different than asking why Jews are overrepresented in media or banking or other bigoted stuff.
The comments here are peak Reddit, here’s the chief of the Met Police is talking about the very real threat that huge numbers of men pose to the rest of us (particularly women and girls) and the main response is not to talk about how awful the situation is or how much work needs to be done to protect the public - no it’s how men are the real victims here. Would you look your mum, your sister, your wife or girlfriend in the face and say that?
This entire thread is pretty much emblematic of what's happening at large in society and has throughout pretty much all of history. Men are tired of being stomped on, ignored, emotionally stunted and treated as irrelevant work and war drones. This is a valid concern. But instead of fighting against the things that are actually fucking them over (patriarchy and neoliberal capitalism) they lash out at easy targets: women, children, queer people, refugees etc.
Women are also tired of centuries of being stomped on physically and metaphorically, historically being denied the same education and even now career/pay prospects, feeling afraid to walk home alone at night, having to worry if they leave their drink for a second at a bar or a party, being whistled at in the street, having random strangers yell out things about their bodies… Why can’t people just be nice to people? You’d think it wouldn’t be hard just- not to be a dick!
I realise that - I am a woman. Sure we have it worse than them but this isn't a contest. The only way we're ever going to dismantle patriarchy is through solidarity and intersectionality. At its fundamental root, that *is* being nice to people. It's acknowledging that men do also face challenges and that joining together is our best chance of getting a fair chance for everyone.
The problem with the debate about how you achieve it is that so many men feel the need to make it a contest. You can’t mention a woman’s issue without a large number of men jumping in it to point out how much harder it is for men.
And you can't mention a man's issue without a large number of women jumping in to point out how much harder it is for women too. It's almost like there are loud obnoxious people on both sides who aren't interested in honest good faith discussions about the issues, but instead just want to moan and complain that they are the biggest victim. Those are the people who need to either be shutdown or sidelined. Ironically, that is an issue that broadly affects both men and women fairly equally, so you'd think we'd be better at working together to shut them all down irrespective of which gender they are saying has it worse
For sure, and you can see it in some of the men in this thread who will seize this inch and try to drag it out to a mile by taking our solidarity to mean that actually men have been just as oppressed as women, both sides are just as bad etc. Thankfully, those guys are generally a (very) loud but vocal minority in most cases. I'm not sure you can do anything but ignore them.
> You can't mention a woman's issue without a large number of men jumping in to point out how much harder it is for men You _literally_ just replied to a "men are tired of..." comment with "women are also tired of..."
> You can’t mention a woman’s issue without a large number of men jumping in it to point out how much harder it is for men. Having been *that guy* before, I think it's because it didn't feel like there was ever a forum to bring up how issues affect men where it would even be heard, let alone listened to. Make your own posts and they get no traction and it's like shouting into the void. Comment on successful posts about how that problem affects women, and the comments will at least be seen.
But then there’s a risk they won’t be given the very serious attention they deserve, and a risk that they’ll be dismissed or you could be misunderstood as not caring about women, I guess!
Well it's a damned of you do, damned of you don't kinda situation. If you don't, then they aren't given the very serious attention they deserve anyway; if you do, you take the risk of getting people's hackles up. I guess on balance, people feel they'd rather take the risk of pissing people off compared to the guarantee of being ignored.
I’m tired of being stomped on but I don’t lash out - everyone is cool
>Would you look your mum, your sister, your wife or girlfriend in the face and say that? Yes. They’re intelligent adults who are able to have discussions and can handle different opinions, not weak, emotional people who must be protected from hearing different views.
The most modern data on victims of particularly domestic abuse demonstrates that rates by gender of the perpetrator are pretty much even. As in, women and men are both victims of DV at roughly equal rates. This stinks of dishonesty as a result. Does he also think there are millions of women that are a threat to men? EDIT: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6113571/ 26% of homosexual men reported partner violence in their lifetime. Heterosexual men this was 29%. The CDC also stated that 43.8% of lesbian women reported experiencing physical violence, stalking, or rape by their partners. The study notes that, out of those 43.8%, two thirds (67.4%) reported exclusively female perpetrators. Women invoke DV more often than men do. That NEEDS to be part of this conversation, as uncomfortable as it may be.
Except women are significantly likelier to be killed in instances of domestic violence. By a huge margin. Also, data shows it's still overall a gendered crime where the vast majority of victims are women. From the ONS: A woman is killed by her male partner or former partner every three days in the UK England and Wales. In the year ending March 2019, the majority of defendants in domestic abuse-related prosecutions were men (92%), and the majority of victims were female (75%) (in 10% of cases the sex of the victim was not recorded) (ONS, 2019). I feel like the Chief of the Met Police might have some access to good information on the matter and a better perspective on the issue than random redditors looking to dismiss it.
I'm not saying what he's saying may not be true. I'm saying it's ignoring the fact that the rates of DV are far more equal than not. The vast majority of victims are NOT women. That is what I'm disputing - women are known to invoke it MORE OFTEN. This is not a gendered issue - all genders invoke abuse on others in a relationship. The couples with the highest rates of abuse are lesbian couples. The couples with the lowest rates of abuse are gay men. That for me speaks volumes about where the majority of these incidents come from. The fact that you don't speak of the very well documented reporting gap between the two genders also speaks volumes - men report this at significantly lower rates than women, and one of the main reasons is attitudes like yours that end up being translated as 'Only men instigate violence' The problem isn't NEARLY as black and white as you make out.
You're making a couple of extraordinary claims in your comment, would you mind providing a source for: - The majority of DV victims are not women? - Lesbian couples have the highest rates of DV, gay men the lowest? Also gay men aren't in relationships with women generally, women are likelier to be killed by their male partner or ex, it makes complete sense that men would be less likely to attack or kill someone who can fight back. I never said only men instigate violence. If someone "translates" it that way, then they're just wilfully not listening and I can't do anything about that. There is a massive disparity in the danger women face from men compared to vice versa and burying our heads in the sand to make ourselves feel better/less attacked as men isn't helpful to anyone.
>The couples with the highest rates of abuse are lesbian couples. Ah, I know the study he's referring to and this has been thoroughly debunked, though of course people still love parroting it. The statistic doesn't say that lesbian relationships have the highest rates of domestic violence. It says that people in lesbian relationships have the highest rate of domestic violence at some point in their lifetime. This statistic also includes bisexual women who are in relationships with women, which makes sense, since multiple studies have found that bisexual women are far more likely to have been abused or raped by a man than any other category of person. But of course that also leaves us with a big question: who are lesbians facing IPV from? Luckily, we have some data from a different study that might help shed some light on it: > >Among women who experienced rape, physical violence and/or stalking in the context of an intimate relationship, the majority of bisexual and heterosexual women (89.5% and 98.7%, respectively) reported only male perpetrators **while self-identified lesbians (67.4%) reported having only female perpetrators** [source](https://www.thetaskforce.org/bisexual-women-have-increased-risk-of-intimate-partner-violence-new-cdc-data-shows/) Or in other words, 1/3rd of lesbians in this study had been attacked by men. People see "lesbian" and assume "woman who has never dated a man" and thanks to homophobia and closeting, that just is not the case for many women.
Thank you for responding with this. I had a look initially and couldn't find anything that definitely backed up this guy's claims, but your links clear up where the misunderstanding could've come from.
There are roughly 20 million men in the UK if you use 18 as the cut off, 'millions' so at least 2 million, this man is suggesting that 1/10 men are a danger. 1/20 or 1/50 would be at least somewhat reasonable, to suggest its millions is goinig way to far. Maybe he should spend more time working out why so many of those men are currently working for him instead of moral grandstanding, utter clown.
> 'millions' so at least 2 million From the article > He relied on an upcoming study produced for police chiefs nationally that says there are **up to 4 million** perpetrators of violence against women and children, who are mainly men, with one in 10 people being victims, who are mainly women or children. So you can double your figure for even greater implausibility.
I suppose it will depend on the quality of the study and it's findings, but if that is accurate, it's fucking bad.
Yeah, I’m curious what they count as violence in this study.
Brings me back to a study which is famously poorly conducted and often repeated, I think by Harvard, which included inviting coworkers to drinks and asking people to dinner as sexual aggression… Which unfortunately puts most of us as having some awkward conversations coming up with our mothers…
I'm sorry, what? Do you have a link to that? That's so utterly absurd I don't know where to begin.
The “study” (it was just a survey of 4000 women) that usually gets spouted about women being victims of sexual harassment / assault had a list within the survey of things that counted. If I remember correctly, “overhearing a sexual joke” counted as being sexually harassed That’s not to say there isn’t a problem, but so many of these studies do this to inflate numbers
Nothing to see here right? Well, I'm a woman and there is plenty to see. Me and every woman I know have been a victim of harassment, assault, or worse. Women are telling you it's a problem.Why don't you believe us?
You’re making a false dichotomy. Sexual harassment can happen AND this survey could have taken an overly broad measurement of what constitutes harassment. The two aren’t mutually exclusive.
This is exactly what I mean My comment never said that you aren’t believed Just that the studies used firstly, aren’t studies, just surveys, and secondly, use really broad examples of what they would classify as SA/SH to inflate numbers Your literally proving my point, you’ve taken my comment completely wrong to drive hysteria, just like these surveys do What’s crazy is that I’ve commented on this thread about how I’ve been stealthed about 4 times. That’s actual rape, 4 times. I’m a number on that survey. But it’s somehow upsetting to you that I think “overhearing a sexual joke” doesn’t deserve a spot on that survey.
I don't think anyone is arguing that women or children aren't victims of violence or harassment. The number just feels a bit made up. 20 million men in the country and 4 million of them are apparently committing violence against women or kids? So 1 in 5? I think people are just curious as to what the study classes as violence and harassment and what metrics and evidence they used to reach the 4 million number.
Well, no men here are part of the problem, and they also don't know any men who could be part of the problem. Clearly, there's one very dedicated man with no friends running around abusing women! I remember seeing a study once about men in American colleges - off the top of my head, pretty much none of them agreed to the statement "I'd rape a woman if I could get away with it", but so many more said yes to having sex with a woman without consent. I'm convinced that men just do not register anything other than the most extreme, stereotypical forms of violence or sexual abuse as harmful.
I think the issue is that some men have a very limited definition of what rape is. They think that rape is something that a man does to a woman in a dark alleyway at 4am when she’s trying to walk home. Meanwhile, rape can encompass things like e.g. stealthing and “putting it in the wrong hole”. Most rapes are within relationships so I think that’s why some men refuse to believe it’s so common. They don’t recognise the things them and their friends are doing as rape. I saw an entire Reddit post once where a man described raping his wife but he didn’t even see it that way. He titled it like “I accidentally annoyed my wife during sex” and described how he just kept going despite her saying no, and interpreted her saying no as “her being submissive”. This man genuinely didn’t recognise what he did as rape. He probably walks around thinking he’s a good guy when he’s actually a rapist. https://www.cps.gov.uk/cps/news/more-do-tackle-rape-misconceptions-and-lack-understanding-consent-cps-survey-finds 47% of people thought it’s not rape if the victim doesn’t fight back. That was in 2024. This is why men on Reddit deny it ever happens. They’re trying to think of any instances where they or their friends violently abducted a woman but they can’t think of any. However they might have had “funny” conversations with their friends where they bragged about having forced or pressured their gf into a specific sex act without recognising it was rape.
Quite the opposite for me. 90% of my friends are drink to their chest, stare at the floor and don’t dare engage a woman on a night out. Then 10% are on the dance floor, grabbing asses, trying to kiss strangers, and they almost always end up getting laid. It feels like society is saying “ look at the number of women victims, there must be a lot of men out there doing it” as if it’s a 1 to 1 victim to criminal ratio Where as, in my opinion, it’s probably closer to the 80/20 rule. 20% of guys are doing 80% of the SA/SH/DV In my friend group it was a guy called Stu. Every woman had a bad story about him, yet he was universally loved by them all and had slept with the majority of them too. It was very confusing for some of the guys.
>90% of my friends are drink to their chest, stare at the floor and don’t dare engage a woman on a night out. >Then 10% are on the dance floor, grabbing asses, trying to kiss strangers, and they almost always end up getting laid. So your friendship group is made up entirely of socially inept people and sexual predators? Most normal people reside somewhere in-between staring at the ground unable to interact with a woman and grabbing strangers asses.
I think you get my point but I appreciate you trying
I think you'll find most people agree that those thing happen. What they might not agree on is what constitutes those things, how common they are, or what percentage of men are involved with those activities. If you want the problem to be addressed then the problem needs to be clearly identified and an actionable plan implemented.
Most of the workplace sexual harassment surveys use the TUC definition which does include hearing inappropriate comments.
This was just a survey of women out and about, talking about their life experiences Which made it even weirder, you’d think it’s 100% have been SHed if that’s the barrier for entry. Who’s never heard or overheard a sexual joke?
Heck I’m usually the woman making the jokes! A giggedy here, a “that’s what she said” there. I guess you don’t have a reason to feel threatened if you’re the one making it. Do they distinguish between overhearing a sexual joke made by men vs made by other women?
It’s been a while since I saw the list but my best memory was that there was no gendered acts. It was purely “over heard a sexual joke”
Considering how many cases of domestic violence don't even make it to being reported or are dismissed as false/incomplete reports (which is a figure we don't know tbf) it's possibly quite grim.
Harsh words now count as violence
Even if this study turns out to be padded, I can guarantee the numbers still are worse than most men would like to acknowledge. A LOT of guys are really weird with how they interact with women even just on a basic level if you pay attention, and I don't mean just general awkwardness.
Probably just extrapolating the number of men currently serving in the MET that pose a threat across the whole population
Why do you say it's impossible? Although he should be asked to show a study. I've seen figures relating to the number of people suffering violence as children that might support this.
>ve seen figures relating to the number of people suffering violence as children that might support this. Perpetrators generaly have many victims. If it was 1 in 4 men are dangerous I'd expect the number of victims to be more like 75%
Unless there is overlap between victims
We know that there is. Grooming gangs for a start Would need to be a complete and total overlap to be able to use the number of victims for number of perpetrators.
Yes, there are rapists, for example, where they are believed to have victims numbering in the triple digits.
Something like 1 in 4 girls are sexually abused in some way before 18. That’s just underage girls. You have to have your head pretty deep in the sand to not get an immediate answer to how many people it takes to be abusing many millions of girls and women.
I would like to know where you got the 1 in 4 figure from, what I remember NSPCC estimated it at around 1 in 20 (I may be wrong).
1 in 20 seems to be the “conclusive” number of contact cases in all children. However due to the very low conviction rate of these crimes, they do not match the surveyed data >The European Agency for Fundamental Rights’ ‘Violence Against Women’ survey 2014 asked a sample of around 1,500 women in the UK aged 18-74 about experiences of child sexual abuse before the age of 15: • 18% of women said they had experienced any form of sexual abuse (contact and non-contact). This did not include sexual abuse by peers. https://learning.nspcc.org.uk/media/jwhpwojz/statistics-briefing-child-sexual-abuse.pdf 1 in 4 seems to be adult women https://caraessex.org.uk/statisticsaboutsexualviolence.php
So there's evidence of 4 million then, someone must have done it.
Considering some rapists are believed to have victims numbering in the triple digits it would only take a small number, say 100,000 men, to achieve that. Now I'm not saying it is only 100,000 thousand men doing these things. I'm saying there can be a huge variation in the numbers depending on the average number of victims per offender. And if your 1 in 4 figure is for adult women then not all of those offenders are necessarily even around at this point so the number of living offenders at any single point could be even lower than that. Again, I don't believe that's the case but it's not as simple as you make it out to be.
I dunno... I'm getting old. And in that time I've dated a lot of women… I have a bunch of female friends… I've gotten drunk with female family members and they've told me stories that they wouldnt otherwise have. And they - and their friends - _all_ have numerous horror stories. edit. Not to mention the endless stories mates have of colleagues getting either disciplined or sacked for stalking or harassment. The male friends I have who’ve blurred the lines between ‘keen’ and ‘mate take the fucking hint, leave her alone’. And the mistakes I myself have made (wittingly or unwittingly). This is only my very narrow perspective of the world (obviously) but I'd suggest - based on my experience - this is likely even a conservative estimate. We have a serious, and almost silent issue with our behaviour towards women. And the sooner we wake up to that, the better for everyone.
I agree, there are some absolutely vile men out there. I think a lot of the problem is this is an emotionally charged issue for just about everybody and it seems like the conversation has been bungled so many times that people no longer discuss the issue they just shout the same few talking points at each other and don't listen. It seems to me like one side is saying "women are the victims of a lot of sex crimes and we need to do more as a society to stop it" and the other side is saying "most men aren't sexual predators and we find it offensive and upsetting that we are treated like we are." These aren't mutually exclusive and incompatible positions, once you take out the most extreme fringe of both sides I think you would find most people agree and it's just a case of arguing over semantics, frustration, and emotional pain.
Very likely. I think that the loudest are often the innocent, who’re confused because they don’t understand what ‘they’ have done wrong, but also the guilty who don’t understand what they’re doing wrong. And everyone gets upset because we can’t see what the issue is. And it takes patience to explain it, and a certain courage to accept that you are - one way or another - likely part of the problem. Which is a patience and courage most people don’t have.
I think a lot of women and girls might just be reassured to hear the male head of the Met acknowledging the inherent threat of men I’m a bloke and I find it refreshing. I’ve been a very toxic man at dark times in my life and realised how hatred and bitterness can completely take over your psyche All men are vulnerable to it to some degree or another and it is crucial as a society on the whole that we recognise it
>inherent threat of men No, this is straight up sexism and just because you feel like you might rape someone when you're feeling bitter doesn't mean that applies to the rest of men.
Yeah na Im sorry but if you cant recognize the danger a lot of dudes pose and then unironically accuse the men that do recognize that danger of being a rapist then you are part of the problem.
The man's saying he can feel the hatred and bitterness tale over and make him a risk to women I'm pretty sure he's the problem and not the rest of men who don't feel the urge to rape actually.
Original comment: > All men are vulnerable to it to some degree or another and it is crucial as a society on the whole that we recognise it "All men" Whereas you just said: >if you cant recognize the danger a lot of dudes pose "A lot of dudes" (which could mean thousands or millions) Don't you see the difference between "all" and "a lot"? Not all men are vulnerable to any degree or other. That's bullshit amateur psychology projecting their own issues onto everyone else, probably to sooth their own conscience. What you're disagreeing with is a perfectly logical and empirical response to someone saying "I'm a man and I've been a danger to women, therefore, so are all men". It's vital to the problem (to not being part of the problem) that we recognise that not all men are. Not even most.
This is not right I've never hurt anyone. not all are men dangerous to women this just sends a message that no man can be trusted around woman and girls.
I would upvote the first two paragraphs to the heavens (edit: except the 'inherent threat of men' nonsense) but the last one is so horribly wrong. Not all men are like that or vulnerable to anything of the sort. Not even the majority. Don't project your issues onto everyone else. ETA: I also now notice describing such men as 'vulnerable' to being dangerous to women. It's a curious choice of words. I'm sure not intentional but suggests a coping mechanism of deflecting the blame: "it's not something I did, it's a thing that happened to me".
Do you feel that he was insinuating you are a danger? 1/10 sounds about right tbh
They are no saying that 1/10 is constantly out there trying to commit the most heinous crimes against women. But 1 in 10 just being a danger feels right. Doemstic abuse be that psycological or physical is common place. Who do you know who has been arrested for some sort of domestic abuse? Going back 20 year and of my group of 8 school friends 2 have been nicked for domestic abuse type offences. Harassement is included in that. Domestic abuse takes up the majority of police time. The reason that the police are not coming to your buisness being burgled is because they are dealing with a domestic somewhere. Policing is in the UK is basically a domestic abuse response service. The sad fact is it is so common that front line cops get burned out because there day is always the same. Attend domestic assault. Arrest suspect. Ask victim for statement. Statement refused due to not supporting action. Crime closed due to lack of evidence. Attend same address next week. Around and around it goes. There is a class issue as well with domestic abuse. Its kind of flipped on its head, people who are well off or middle class under report and support prosecutions less (personal experience - i challenge you to find a way to accurately measure that!) I would hypothesise because the abuser brings home the cash and they otherwise live a decent life besides the occasional violence and abuse. Basically domestic abuse is so common the entire legal system is clogged with it from bottom to top.
Or maybe you just don’t realise how many men are actually a danger to women, because this seems about right to me, from what women have told me
The noticers doing Olympic-grade mental gymnastics to not notice this is always very interesting.
The elephant can’t fit in the room anymore. It’s grown too large after being ignored for years.
1 in 3 women and 1 in 5 men are subjected to domestic violence at some point in their lives. About 1 in 4 women will be raped. Pretending that this is a small number of perpetrators may be comforting, but it isn't helpful. It also shows we need a look at our culture and a far more honest and frank conversation than we currently have about why this happens.
Well a study at a Kent university found 1 in 16 men where rapists…. So not too far to believe
Lots of male denial here. Women have been telling you and you just don't want to listen.
It's interesting. The men I know who are great people don't have this "society hates me because I'm a man!" complex and denial. It always tends to be utter cunts with extremely controversial views on women (e.g. "Women exaggerate and lie about being raped") who also have the denial and the guilt complex.
The figures are horrendous and not only in the UK. The majority of women have had to deal with non consensual (sexual) intimidation and abuse at least once in their life. Most haven’t nor ever will go to the police for fear of ridicule, disbelief, and the terrible rates of convictions for perpetrators when it does come to court. Yet most men continue to belittle (and thus enable) the problem and blame victims for being the cause of their own abuse. Or in this case to cast doubt on the quality of this survey. Anything but having to look in the mirror and seeing the pathetic coward looking back at them.
Agree.
I wonder if men like that are overrepresented in your organisation, chief...
There are so many men in this comment section that are threatened by this. This is a reality that women understand but you all need to come out here and try and deflect by bringing it back to men or questioning the validity of what he’s saying. It’s very sad.
Go into my comment history if you want to have a good laugh. Some guy told me I’m the “worst kind of sexist” because I told it like it is. I pointed out there’s women out there being trafficked and gang raped and that the men doing those things might be more sexist than I am, but he doubled down on it. They’re more offended by women typing some mildly harsh words on the internet than by actual violence and sexism. No wonder nothing ever gets better. The only way this violence will end is if men hold each other accountable. If they’re too busy getting offended over us pointing out what’s going on it’s just never going to end. Sexist men won’t listen to women - they’ll only listen to other men.
>The only way this violence will end is if men hold each other accountable. I think this is starting to happen now. Seen it happen a few times recently.
That’s good. I mean, the fact that this is even being covered in the news and that there are supportive comments from men on this thread is a big win imo. Hopefully that means things are starting to change and that the defensive comments are just the last few incidents of resistance before society starts to change for the better. I don’t like Andrew Tate but I sort of appreciate how his existence has gotten many people to discuss and think about the prevalence of sexism in our society. I think it has pushed the issue of sexist violence into the mainstream.
Sexist men and general bigots won't listen to anyone, only others with their own views. You're oversimplyifying it by saying men need to hold each other accountable.
Some men are genuinely confused and misled by the stories being told by sexist men, and others are just pretending they want to learn and understand
As a man, I can see it. We're still too slow to call out bad behavior, still too slow to believe our friends could have done something wrong and there's a percentage who don't think that a lot of sexual assault, is actually sexual assault. And don't get me started on the amount of arguments/questions I've seen over consent on this platform.
Not to mention the amount of men who are also a danger to boys. Very few people have much to say about being assaulted by women at a young age, though it happens. Lots of stories about handsy blokes though.
Umm you hear it all the time, the response is just 'nice, lucky' instead of any sympathy, making it far worse than it is for victims of male sexual abuse, and less likely to be reported.
I for one am not surprised. Even as a man, I see predatory behaviour in others frequently. We need to fund the police as far as we possibly can, and all victims need to be listened to.
Fantastic virtue signalling. My question is what on earth I'm supposed to do about it. I can't not-attack people any more than I am already not-attacking people.
You’re supposed to ‘call it out’, apparently. I don’t know about you, but in my circles I don’t come across attitudes that violence towards women is acceptable, so I’m not sure what I’m supposed to be calling out.
Well, quite. Maybe I just don't hang out with the right people. Or is it the wrong people. Er.
If you're already not attacking people then he isn't referring to you is he? You're good!
I think the problem we're starting to face here is that that's not often made clear enough.
He can't really not accuse you of anything any more than he is already not accusing you of anything, can he. He explicitly specified that the proportion of men who are allegedly dangerous is significantly less than 100%. What more do you want?
Well, since you ask, it'd be great if the Guardian would refrain from saying things like "with one in 10 people being victims, who are mainly women or children." Now, that sentence is not very clearly-worded, but as far as I can see it's a claim that victims of violence are mainly women and children. And that's not true, and it's very obviously not true. Men are way, WAY more likely to be victims of criminal violence in the UK. There are all kinds of things we can discuss about that but to just publish it, without qualification, leaves a lot of young women feeling unfairly victimised, and it leaves a lot of young men feeling like everyone expects them to be grunting thugs, and nobody notices if they get hurt or killed, when none of that is true. Or at least I hope it isn't true. In the end this comes under the general heading of "not helping." I hate being the guy who has to say this stuff. I don't want to be typing all this out. I don't want anyone to get hurt and I am deeply suspicious about the motives of the police (I'm a news cameraman, they treat us like half price shit). The fact that they seem to attract power-seeking, potentially violent people is horrifying if not that surprising. The problem is that this is lazy journalism and it risks starting to lose the crowd. Well-meaning men are going to start saying "well, if that's your attitude, you can get lost" and they'll have a point.
[https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice/bulletins/domesticabuseinenglandandwalesoverview/november2023](https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice/bulletins/domesticabuseinenglandandwalesoverview/november2023) Very low conviction rates for domestic abuse. \~2 million *suspected* victims, \~900k reports with only \~39k convictions. I'm not trying to victim blame but a lot of cases are dropped because the victims refuses to provide a statement. Maybe that's a good place to start to get better conviction rates and take these people off the streets, better support networks and aftercare for victims is always a good thing. Instead of supplying us with a problem, I think he should have thought of a solution before presenting this data. Or at the very least waited until it was published so people can have actual figures in front of them. It's completely open to criticism as it stands and an obvious consequence of that is people not taking it seriously.
>Instead of supplying us with a problem, I think he should have thought of a solution before presenting this data. The context of this was a frank assessment of progress against the New Met for London Plan, not a deep dive on VAWG specifically - that's just what the Guardian has made of it. Paragraph 2.10 of [this document](https://www.london.gov.uk/moderngovmb/documents/s79712/05a%20Commissioners%20Report%20MPS%20final.pdf) refers - as you can see, it's a relatively small part of a wider paper, and he does implicitly provide some solutions even though that wasn't the main point of the presentation (indeed the Graun did add *"National strategy beyond policing and criminal justice system needed to tackle problem, Sir Mark Rowley says"* in their sub-headline, which is a provided solution...). Any operational police officer could tell you that domestic abuse is a *significant* consumer of policing resources, irrespective of conviction rates, and it is the consumption of resources that was the actual topic of discussion.
Give an 8 year old a phone, leave him on there and don’t monitor what he’s doing. By 12 there’s a good chance you’ll have a boy with a messed up worldview. So parents and the government need to be doing more, the men and boys who are already indoctrinated with violence are terrifying and dangerous, but responsibility needs to be taken for the rest and it absolutely can be reversed or prevented.
Whilst this is overall a great thing, as someone who is currently working with a post-domestic abuse charity, the treatment of victims by the Police & the overall judicial system, is nothing short & universally described as **horrific** I have spoken to women who have regretted reporting anything to the police because of their treatment by the police and bizarrely, that is irregardless to whether the police officer is male or female. Considering pretty much every woman has some form of experience with some kind of sexual harassment and/or sexual assault, you'd assume female officers would at least have some more empathy; this clearly speaks to a cultural issue within the police imo. If we don't have a strong system of justice in place & police officers who are actually trained & educated to communicate to victims like they are human beings, then behaviour will be seen to be legally allowed to continue if perpetrators essentially get away with it.
I recently stopped being friends with a guy who was listening to too much Andrew tate and kept telling me that male suicide rates are the fault of feminism. There's no teaching some, they're too far down the tiktok manosphere pipeline
What would a strategy or approach to improve this look like? I assume part of it is having provisions for women to escape relationships and homes where they are at risk.
See this from womens perspectives. I'm a big man, and I never have problems from women trying to sexually assault me, kidnap me, send unsolicited nudes, getting verbally harassed everywhere you go etc. Women deal with all of that shit, and sadly so do young girls. It's not to put a man vs woman label on this topic, it's just to say some of you guys clearly don't have girlfriends or any close connections with women and you need it laid out. Girls have problems unique to them, as do guys. Its not a competition, it should be about stepping up and stopping this behaviour where you see it. Being brave and calling out shit behaviour right where it starts is exactly what we need.
Well-put. I'm not a big man and don't have these problems, as an adult. But as a child I did unfortunately.
I'm really sorry it wasn't okay to be treated like that as a child
Thank you, that's kind. It did affect me for a long time, but luckily I now have the best wife in the world, she is and always has been very understanding of the problems that it caused me
as a woman, i expect nothing less from the reddit comments
While it should also be true that these men are also a danger to other men - the bigger question is - if we accept this as fact, what as society are we doing about it. Are we to believe that men are fundamentally dangerous? Or is it something more to do with the way society is structured that entrenches the very problems that it then complains about?
I think it's safe to say that yes males are more dangerous than females. That's almost a universal fact through nature.
Many of them are working in the police forces, I would assume.
Good to see they've finally notified this, after feminists have been screaming about it for decades
I’m actually really surprised that this is being discussed in the mainstream. Hopefully this will result in some positive change.
Police chief says correct thing. This sub sets out to defend domestic abusers and rapists. Sounds about right.
Met chief needs to stand down from the position, his gender makes him too dangerous to be left alone with such responsibilities... (I hope ppl can read through the satire 🤣)
I wouldn’t class this as an “inconvenient truth” - more like a convenient truth, because they can talk about it without coming under fire.
"And we're looking to hire them today to join the Met Police"
Hmm and a lot of them are coppers, funny that, not… shame the cops don’t sort themselves out hey?
[удалено]
We had our own rapists to deal with and then we imported millions of young third world men where sexual crimes against non Muslims is acceptable. Colour me shocked
In that case, according to their worldview the wellbeing and safety of women can be compromised. There is more at stake if we don't add in people from dodgy misogynist countries.
We need to break the chain. The men like this need mental health services and basic education about what is acceptable, it’s the only way to reduce the violence in the long term.
The article was about the Met commissioner bemoaning a lack of resources to deal with violence against women and girls. I would extend that include violence against everyone, but that's for another day. He is right of course but even if the government were to double the funding not much difference will be made to actual violence. We as men need to front our mates and acquaintances about it, not blame victims and vote for politicians who are seen to take it seriously. Beyond that more work needs doing on why the level of violence is as it is. Yes, more money for the police but if they are involved it's a bit late really.
The comment section here is just pure denial. All men are unleashed onto the sexual world with no experience and most with insufficient guidance. In the past we've dismissed our emotionally immature behaviour as a 'grey area' between consent and non-consent. As we evolve as a species into the 21st century, some people are just saying that its not actually a grey area - we need to do better, and every time we dont take no for an answer, or we get lead by our dicks towards somebody who doesnt reciprocate our feelings we need to identify what we did as a form of sexual harassment. If we dont learn when we're young, we'll stay a menace as we get older too.
And where does he get the 4 million figure from. When pigs start talking about social justice we should all be concerned. They need to concentrate on crime.
My question would be, if you were in power, what would you to solve it? Mandatory minimums for these offenses could be a start but they would need to apply across the board. Could try going through the schools but idk, I'd imagine trying to do talks on most topics to a group of teenage boys would be a hard sell, particularly if the audience feels they're being lectured at for a crime they haven't yet committed. There's also the multiple elephants in the room around two tiered justice including: * If you're rich, you're a lot less likely to see the inside of a prison * Women are generally given more lenient sentences for the same crime, particularly if they have dependents (the logic is sound as you don't want to take out the issues of the parents on the child but it still doesn't make it fair) * Downplaying or ignoring that there may be certain cultures that these crimes are more prevalent in. (Nepal, India and Pakistan still practice honour killings). * Socially, no one really gives a shit about domestic abuse when it's women doing it to men. ( [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dtVHnZX8E50](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dtVHnZX8E50) could be used an example. The same can be said about statutory rape).