Another angle on the gender politics of Valentines Day apart from stereotypical gifts. In the states, there’s a culture war being fought over reclaiming Valentines Day for Cupid, lerve, and “traditional courting and dating” by conservatives on campuses. Take back the date! [pdf], they cry! The pretext for this is a campaign highlighting violence against women and girls – V-Day. In the mix is the huge fight over the play The Vagina Monologues, which has become a scapegoat and a stand in for all sorts of imagined feminist demons. There are several fronts in this war – conservative Catholics, for instance, are targetting Catholic college admins who allow performances of the play on campus, as a test of their “Catholic identity”. The fascinating thing, though, is that while I think such a culture wars debate over Valentines Day in Australia is (at least so far) unimaginable, there are some serious issues about gender politics at play in this stoush, and some vital issues being highlighted. Let’s face it, folks, there are real issues about domestic violence and dating violence which can’t be covered up by talk about “lerve”. Cupid’s arrow sometimes has a very sharp tip. Read more at Feministing and from blogger Ann Friedman in her column, “V for Vendetta” in The American Prospect.
Free Cupid! The plea was repeated today on fliers spread around the campuses of the University of Missouri-Columbia, Arizona State, and a handful of other colleges across the country. The image? A cherub shackled to a ball and chain, head hung low, weeping. The culprit? The Vagina Monologues.“The V-Day movement is about taking away Valentine’s Day, the one day a year used to celebrate every form of love, in the name of stopping domestic violence,” Amber Hanneken, president of the University of Missouri campus Republican group, told the student newspaper.
As if! To Hanneken, talking about violence against women on Valentine’s Day is a total buzz kill. Today is a day that’s supposed to be about Hallmark, diamonds, and the Whitman’s Sampler. How can true romance flourish if you’re raising awareness of domestic and dating violence while bluntly discussing your ladyparts?
Hanneken is part of a counter-campaign, run by the conservative group the Independent Women’s Forum, to “Take Back the Date.” The program, whose title mocks anti-violence “Take Back the Night” marches, implores student to reject the vulgarity of the “v-word” and initiate a return to a more chivalrous era.
The “Independent” Women’s Forum creeps me out.
They’re so independent, gosh dang it! They don’t need no shrill hairy angry [cue synchronised clutching of pearls in front of the fainting couches] feminists (the horror)to tell them what to think! No-sirree, they’ll just take whatever those ballbreaking feminists (or, more likely, strawfeminists) say, refuse to even think about it because it might have dyke-cooties, and then do the exact opposite!
That will show the RealMen(TM) just how independent they are, golly gee, and then they’ll want to marry them, thus making their lives complete. Hurrah! pass the Long Island teas!
The Independent Womens Forum (sic) will have to campaign against anti-Valentines Day outrage among militant Hindus and Muslims on the subcontinent:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/2749667.stm
And the Catholic conservatives should be attacking the Church for deleting St. Valentine from the calendar and transferring SS. Cyril and Methodius’ feast day to 14 Feb.
I mean who gives a stuff,to me its just another imported thing we can live without like Halloween,if some silly yanks want to argue over it let em go for it,I get a bit sick of the americianisation of this country
Unfortunate Coincidence
By the time you swear you’re his,
Shivering and sighing,
And he vows his passion is
Infinite, undying —
Lady, make a note of this:
One of you is lying.
Hmmmm, I listened to The Vagina Monologues on tape. 50 hours of my life I’ll never get back. Painful!!
It’s surely time we moved beyond Reclaim the Date and Reclaim the Night. Both seem to be exclusive and not particularly enticing for most women. Reclaim the Night is such a depressing night out. However, issues surrounding violence and relationships need to be discussed. The right balance never seems to be struck.
The gentle click of doors closing.
Talking about issues of sexual violence is like whispering into a half empty stadium. Aside from the rare guy who not only gets it but is prepared to say so , this falls into the category of “someone elses’ problem.” I’d say reclaim the night is just a bit old, that is the only reason why it has lost its power. Of course a return to courtly love is absolutely the answer. Being raped with cascading locks in a renaissance fair tunic is so much more comfortable.
I don’t know how you acheive balance in the discussion. It is going to be depressing whichever way you do it. Is there really a need to entice women? I just think there is a need for brutal honesty from all sides. I have an odd bunch of aquaintances- some of them are mad as hell about the violence they have suffered, most laugh it off and “put it behind them”, an exceptionally rare few have escaped it entirely. All of the perps in these cases are walking free. oblivious and subject to absolutley no sanction from their mates.
I’d like to hear from the mates, personally. This is about changing male culture.
suze, the LP blokes have waded a few times into discussion of violence against women. tig’s White Ribbon Day thread was a good example. There is a growing awareness with men about the issue of violence against women. The comments are a good example that many men do get it. Unfortunately there are some comments where it is apparent that they some that have no clue.
My impression is quite a few blokes read and appreciate posts such as this one by Kim and the aforementioned one of tig’s. That we all don’t say ‘good on ya” is not an admittance that we think it is a woman only issue or the like. It is the nature of blogging to a degree. Still we should speak out more as it is an issue that affects both genders.
Things are changing (for the better) but there is still plenty to be done.
Which to your mind are the worst aspects of male culture that engender violence against women, suze?
I once had to wait for months and months before a friend was ready to even admit that her abusive (but technically not violent) partner was in fact abusive.
In fact, she said something critical of her partner once, then clammed up for nine months after that. I didn’t dare say anything to her partner (who, incorrectly, thought of me as a friend) because I was worried that I would leave my friend with the repercussions, while I enjoyed my moral high ground safe at home.
In the middle of that time I gave her a mobile phone. ‘So that you’ll both be able to use it, in case [partner's name]‘s phone stops working’, I lied. (Of course he had the only mobile and always answered the home phone)
She now says she realised at the time exactly what I and my friends were doing in giving her the phone, and talks about how shaky, shocked and nervous the thought of actually rebelling against her partner made her.
A couple of months after that, we started regularly dissing her partner behind his back, and after a couple of months of that she saw a chance, took it and moved out.
I strongly suspect that, unless we had been prepared to carry her out of her house, and keep her apart from her partner by force, any other course of action would have made things worse.
While I morally agree with suze that mates should clamp down immediately on violence against their mates’ partners, I have no idea at the moment about how to make that a habit among men. Unless a large majority of a man’s mates confronted him and told him he no longer has a partner [NOT “you have to stop this”, but “you no longer have a girlfriend, and all of us say so”), then there will be cracks for violent men to slide through.
Obviously the habits that would make this a reality don’t exist at the moment. What is the best way to make them common?
If you still have two or three mates – even better, two or three mates who are prepared to make excuses for your violence – then your partner could be in an even more isolated place than before.
And then there is the problem of violently-treated women (and men, but women are the victims in by far the majority of the cases of domestic violence) internalising the blame for their own situation. This makes it very difficult for those women to take action even if there are men willing to physically defend her from violence. It also makes it very difficult for supporters and allies of victims to decide when to act.
I think there need to be long-term plans to get strong, independent and healthy ideas into the heads of all women, so that what men do becomes less important, but that doesn’t solve today’s problems.
The elephant in the room with domestic violence (and date rape and violence) is all the myths that exist about men protecting women from the big bad outside. Whatever demon that may be. The stats are still terrifying. Most rapes and murders are not by random strangers but by men against women within intimate and family relationships. It’s in everyone’s interest to deal with this – men’s too. As Ann says in her column, there’s this myth embedded in all the sweet stories of romance and nostalgia for datin’ and courtin’ that men are wild beasts and women must draw the line. If they don’t, they’re sluts and deserve what they get. It’s totally in men’s interests too to break out of these horrible prisons of narrative about what does and doesn’t constitute lerve.
No I don’t know either. But I think that you are exactly the kind of person who will be doing it. You only have to know a few people in the situation you describe and you begin to see patterns that are detectable in others. The other side is to have a legal system that responds appropriately. We need to have law reform in this areaThe Australian Centre for the Study of Sexual Assault is funded by the Office for the Status of Women and is a vital service. We still have huge gaps in the area of research. UK studies recently showed that one third of sexual assault cases that were dropped at the police investigation stage actually had sufficient evidence for charges to be laid. There is no comparable research yet published in Australia to my knowledge. And I agree with you that the changes are going to be mirrored – healthier expectations from women and healthier behaviour from men .
The culture of silence. The culture of keeping each others secrets of not getting involved of minding your own business of finding it much easier to discuss David Hicks and Iraq that the routine violence within one’s own street. All intertwined with people’s own experiences of violence and abuse which are distressingly common. That sounds pat but it reflects reality. Sometimes it takes years before it becomes clear that these are not isolated incidents, that there have been patterns of offending or victimization spanning generations. – why do you think it happens WBb ?
That’s where those dumbass federal government ads were misleading and unhelpful. It’s not that a “mate” can presume on that special homosocial matiness to stamp out their “mate’s” bad behaviour. It’s rather that men who care about these things can resist constantly the urge to join in conversations that sexualise and demean and objectify women. You don’t necessarily need to say why you’re not joining in. Just don’t, and live in your own life and practice respect for women, and indicate your disapproval of “she needs a good root” etc., and you’re doing something meaningful because you’re changing the way you live your masculinity. As to specific situations where you become aware that a friend is abusing a partner, try talking to her. He’s not worthy of being your friend, and strange as it may seem, pointing that out to him, and actually showing a degree of care, might make him think again. Or not. But you’ve tried.
And he might think again next year, or on his deathbed. But the more men who live true repricocity in relationships and in relating, the more it cascades and action by action, changes cultural patterns. It’s really difficult to do, and I don’t at all underestimate that, but it’s so worth doing.
Sometimes in life hard choices have to be made, and they should be made in favour of someone who’s suffering.
To love someone, or to be someone’s friend, is not necessarily to acquiesce. Often, your true regard is shown better by challenging them as to how they behave and what impact it has on others. You might be surprised how often it makes an impact.
There’s a real role in life for people who shake and disturb others’ habituated patterns of behaviour.
It’s always the case that if someone is doing violence to another, they are doing violence to themselves as well.
Amen to that.
Btw, David, my penultimate comment isn’t meant to be a comment on your thoughts about the situation your friend found herself in and your actions. I was riffing off that to the fed government “approved” how to stop domestic violence crud. Just realised I didn’t make that clear enough.
I don’t want to be a try-hard-more-pro-feminist-than-thou man, but is this really the case?
I think most abusive men would regard it as dead against their interests to be forced to do the painful self-analysis that is part of realising you act abusively.
I think it is in the short term interest, at least, of those men to keep things exactly as they are.
If you change, not only will you have to admit the things that you have done, but you’ll also either have to completely turn around the way you act in a relationship, or just stay out of relationships because you know you can’t make them work.
This is not an argument for never trying to reach those men, but if you have to make a choice about which one you help, then morally the victim is first in line.
As to violence by those known to the victim, this excerpt from the 2005-2006 Qld police statistical report (pp 91-100, pdf file)
shows 57% of assaults and 81% of sexual offences were committed by someone the victim knew personally. (p 99)
And yet the main focus is indeed the ‘evil masked stranger in the park’.
While, for instance, the Qld Police’s Operation Echo Shine (a campaign to catch men who attack women on Brisbane’s bike paths) is very important, (and it’s good and probably empowering that women were angry enough to march in the streets about it), if the same proportion of media attention and police resources were given to domestic violence, then it would never be out of the newspapers for a single day.
http://www.police.qld.gov.au/programs/crimeStoppers/echoshine.htm
So true. I’ve spent a fair bit of time explaining to my son what I don’t like about the hip hop videos which feature a lot of demeaning images of women. He still gets to watch those videos but he is now thinking about what messages are being conveyed in other circumstances as well and he understands what I mean. He is not neurotypical so I get a much better picture of how boys talk amongst themselves at school than I otherwise might because he doesn’t censor any of it. It is pretty disturbing what some boys of eight and nine are saying about girls and how they are acting toward them.
I think what Kim says about those who violate others are violating themselves at the same time is important here. It is a big hurdle to overcome- the painful self-realisation but at some level I think men are aware of the damage they are inflicting upon themselves- there is that common experience of shame, guilt, plummeting self concept then another outbreak of violence. Which is why people involved in offender rehabilitation speak out against the kind of vigilantism which seeks to continue to shame the offender in perpetuity. Although it is completely understandable, this may actually make society less safe, not more so.
First of all protect the victim stop the offending but it is definitely in offenders interests to stop, even if as you say, they don’t recognise it.
A cherub shackled to a ball and chain, head hung low, weeping.
…Paging Helen Garner!…
If at a minimum the truth of the matter is what’s needed then where is the truth?
It seems that most men have “no clue” because most men are actually on the receiving end of low-grade physical and verbal abuse and not the aggressor. My experience is that most men don’t violate women in any manner that would be considered “unequal” or criminal. And that leads us to another point… Why is this issue that important? If men and women are of equal status then violence should be met with criminal sanction regardless of the gender makeup.
If you raise boys on the notion that girls are their equal and then turn around acting as if violence between them requires special attention, you have sent very conflicting messages.
The next issue that doesn’t see the light of day is the impetus behind the sexualizing fashion, gyrating hip-hop videos and objectifying pornography. Is it really the average man that is the engine that drives this cultural malaise? Or, is the engine a very defined demographic that can be identified by political ideology and/or sexual orientation?
If women and men are concerned about stopping violence against women then a good look in the mirror should be the start.
Have you ever been trapped for years in a family or relationship where someone physically stronger than you felt it was OK to be violent towards you?
Has anyone here argued that when females commit violence against men (or, for that matter, their female partners), then they should not be charged?
If that is the case (and it’s a HUGE ‘if’, especially about the word ‘most’) then what do you propose be done to change this?
I don’t know if you’ve noticed, but average female body weight and explosive muscle power is less than average male body weight and explosive muscle power. Many women have lower weight, height and strength than the majority of men they know.
Given this physical disparity, many women are at risk of violence if men they know are willing to use that violence against them.
This means that an important problem in the real world tends to be one of male physical violence against women. Your argument of ‘conflicting messages’ only would hold true in a world where all humans are of roughly equal size, weight and power. Since that is not the world we live in, your argument is wrong and is likely to support men who think that violence is OK.
It is precisely this sort of comment that helps women who are physically abused to blame themselves. You are directly encouraging men to use violence against women. Your words also do nothing to help men or women who are physically absued by women.
I think this is exactly what you want.
David, I don’t think physical size and strength is the key issue here at all. Women, regardless of their relative size and strength, often don’t even attempt to defend themselves from a physical assault, apart from trying to get out of the way, because they are simply not capable of it at the time, though not inherently incapable. Why, I am not sure. But women are much less likely to have been the aggressors, or have been involved in physical fights with either other women or men. It doesn’t come as “naturally”.
“…because most men are actually on the receiving end of low-grade physical and verbal abuse and not the aggressor.”
Not me and most men I know Soredaddy. But I guess we’re not pussies like you.
“…the impetus behind the sexualizing fashion, gyrating hip-hop videos and objectifying pornography. Is it really the average man that is the engine that drives this cultural malaise?”
Ever heard the expression “sex sells”?
“Or, is the engine a very defined demographic that can be identified by political ideology and/or sexual orientation?”
Ohh, that sounds sinister. You think it might be them derned poofters and feminazis again, out to sap and impurify our precious bodily fluids? Tarnation!
Karen, what you say is correct.
I imagine this is the product of a culture that has, for most of history, regarded strong, capable women who can stand up for themselves as grotesque.
I also think that the physical habits of fighting back against violence are not taught to women – one class four times a year at school just doesn’t cut it.
And thirdly, when women are assaulted by people they know and trust, I imagine the shock and surprise of that is a factor.
I do suspect that this culture could not have taken root if women and men were roughly equal in size and strength, but certainluy, even if there was a magic pill that could physically equalise women and men, then the cultural factors would still have to be overcome.
Want some chicken with those eggs?
It’s discussions like this that keep me returning to LP. Helping (their mothers have done most of the educating) to prepare two daughters to deal with day to day reflex sexism, but specially how to “read the trail” early when packs of booze fueled steppenwolves are on the prowl, and how they should scout wide, has not been easy. So far so good in as much as the worst humiliations my beloved girls have been subjected to have been en passent “phwoooars” or equivalent neanderthal gruntings.
Kim and David and suze, your exchange has been inspirational.
One of the finest compliments my daughters pay me on a fairly frequent basis is; “dad, my backs all knotted up, can you please give me a massage?” They know the difference between healing touch and other types of human contact. Kinda proud of that.
EC, I probably would not have posted anything if suze had not pretty much challenged men to, so thanks is due to her in particular.
I’d also like to extend my thanks to commenters for a very worthwhile discussion.
David,
Yours is a confused and convoluted argument.
You ask,
No, I haven’t, but that misses the point. How exactly are women “trapped” and what does this have to do with the average male or this “male” culture that keeps being bandied about as somekind of all-encompassing cause for violence towards women? If you assert an equality between men and women then are some men equally “trapped” in these situations?
Then you ask,
Well first, if it is TRUE then it may go along way to explain SOME violence against women. But, we don’t really want to talk about those men that use their average physical advantage to fend off abusive women.
Lastly, you say,
This goes to the heart of the problem and the notion that men and women are “equal.” I think it would be fair to say that those small minority of men that commit violence towards women see them as inferior in most respects. But, what of a generation of boys that have grown up with the message that the girls are “equal?” How have they been raised to “respect” girls?
Your last comment isn’t worth rebuttal, but I noticed that NO ONE will touch the makers of sexualizing fashions, gyrating hip-hop videos and objectifying pornography. These aren’t the fruits of “male” culture. These things are “progressive” creations, but keep that a secret.
Some women are trapped by men who threaten to kill or injure them if they leave.
By whom? When, where? Or are you setting up a straw feminist?
Yes, some men are trapped in violent situations as well, by both male and female partners. Some women are also abused by female partners.
What plan do you propose to help them, instead of chipping away at women who talk about man-on-woman violence?
Rubbish. I am more than willing to admit that there are abusive women and abused men. Now that I have again accepted this fact, (that you smugly assume cannot be accepted by someone who supports women’s liberation), what plan to you propose to help those men?
Or is your whole strategy one of damaging women’s liberation by snidely accusing people of not recognising that women can be abusive too?
If you don’t think that “sexualizing fashions, gyrating hip-hop videos and objectifying pornography” are made for a male market, for whom do you think they are made?
David,
You seem to enjoy going against the grain, but on this particular issue you seem to engage in unoriginal thought.
Without asking how a person in our respective societies can be “trapped” by words into a violent situation, it should be clear that such situations are rather limited (This isn’t a discussion about “other” male cultures). This means that most men neither violently abuse their womenfolk nor trap them with threatening words. It’s a myth to think otherwise and can go along way to explain why men have “no clue.”
Furthermore, there is some pretty compelling evidence, along with my own anectodal evidence, that points towards a situation where a small minority of men in our respective societies may commit a higher degree of violence towards a corresponding set of women while a much larger group of men suffer low-grade verbal and physical abuse by an equivalent number of women. It’s a quality over quantity issue which is reflected by general physical differences and the innate desire for women to have intense control over those things closest to them.
This means that the reality in our societies is that of a general male population that shows resistance and restraint in being violent towards the very women who show a lesser degree of civility. It has been noted quite frequently and increasingly of “other” males culutres showing great disrespect and violence towards the womanfolk in our societies. Is there a discussion here?
Lastly, you still show fear in addressing the creators of the sexualizing fashions, gyrating hip-hop videos and objectifying pornography. Of course, these things are marketed to males, but how does that exculpate the “progressive” pushers of such cultural malaise? And you won’t argue that such product and services aren’t marketed to a particular “progressive” male demographic?
Note:
I had a question that wasn’t allowed and so I’ll ask again.
If you assert the “equality” of men and women then how can you object to women being “objectified?”
It’s not the men who view women as their equals who are doing the objectifying.
Thus, when other men are objectifying women, it is perfectly consistent for egalitarian men to object to this dehumanisation through objectification.
You can’t genuinely be this obtuse.
tigtog,
You say,
This is logically and empirically false.
To treat a woman as an “equal” is to “objectify” her in the strictest sense of these words.
Furthermore, it is the “progressive” male and female (including a high degree of homosexuals and lesbians) that are the impetus behind sexualizing fashion, gyrating hip-hop videos and objectifying pornography. These are the very people claiming to believe in “equality” and logically conclude with their objectification of women and girls alike.
The “strictest sense”, you say? I’m getting more than a whiff of semantic sophistry here.
Saying it over and over again doesn’t make it true.
Hello Kim,
I would just like to inform you that I was used as a source in this article without permission and the author got several “facts” wrong, including that I am president of the republican organization. I only discovered the article by doing a Google search for my name, which is also how I found you. If this doesn’t show you enough sloppy journalism, I suggest you check out the facts of the V-day Unveiled Movement and IWF’s “Take Back the Date” Campaign. Our goal is not to reinforce traditional gender rolls but to rid our campuses of a play we find to be degrading. The article also failed to mention that sales of flowers and such that our campaign does, donates all the procedes to the same or similar organizations as the V-day causes. We aren’t against stopping violence against women, we’re against the form that they use to do it. I don’t know if you have seen the Monologues but the play itself does nothing to inform women on how to combat violence and instead highlights things like “good rape” and leaving your successful career to be a dominatrix.
I will be contacting the author of this article about her lies but I thought I would leave you a message as well.
Thank you for your time,
Amber Hanneken
Thanks for leaving the comment, Amber. I’ll also take up your concerns with the author of the article.