So I wasn’t really planning to write anything today but I just got finished reading a piece on GQ by some mental midget named Rupert Myers titled Men’s Rights Activists are cave dwelling idiots. Gee where have I heard that before? The only weird thing about this is that Myers is writing this as if it’s new, or edgy, or something. MRA’s have largely been the object of scorn and ridicule ever since the general internet public became aware of their existence. To back up his claim that MRA’s are willfully ignorant to what Myers refers to as ‘a statistical tide‘, he provides us with some numbers and zero citations. Numbers that he claims provide a ‘near-universal consensus on the mistreatment and inequality of women‘. Let’s take a look at them, shall we, I’m sure the journalistic ethics of GQ will hold up to my humble scrutiny.
Come At Me Bro
Stat 1: Women and girls account for about 70 per cent of the victims of human trafficking.
Well, yes, that number is probably fairly accurate. In fact in my research many sources put the number of women and girls as high as 80%. However, like many of these issues, the reality is actually a lot more complicated than the story that is told in numbers.
One criticism that anti-feminists will often point out, is that feminists love to use global stats in a local context. Feminists are often criticized for not concerning themselves with the plights of women in developing nations but using the stats of abuse against those women to their own advantage. Unsurprisingly the human trafficking statistic is an example of this.
A study of human trafficking of children in New York city from 2008 found that as high as 50% of the victims were boys. It’s also important to understand that children involved in sex work tend to be considered defacto victims of human trafficking, even tho many of them choose it and many don’t consider themselves to be victims, since women more commonly enter sex work than men this will of course have an effect on the overall statistics. For anyone not understanding the implications allow me to make it very clear: women choose to become prostitutes and are then considered victims of human trafficking, it’s that simple. It’s also not uncommon for women to be the ones recruiting girls into sex work. However other victims, like the large number of men thrown into forced labour in the prison industrial complex for petty drug crimes, are of course not considered victims of human trafficking.
“We’re conditioned as a community to identify female victims more readily,” she said, “because that has been the more prominent focus of the anti-trafficking movement.”
It’s also important to consider that we are simply not conditioned to look for male victims. When the United Nations launched it’s Global Plan of Action to Combat Trafficking in Persons in 2010 it also called for the setting up of a voluntary trust fund for victims of trafficking, especially women and children. Because the fact that there are less male victims means the ones that do exist don’t deserve help, I guess.
In his address, General Assembly President Ali Treki emphasized the human rights aspects of the fight against trafficking. “Abduction, coercion, trafficking across national and international borders, forcing women and children into sexual exploitation and servitude – this must not be accepted in today’s world,” he said.
Another criticism often lobbed at MRA’s is that they blame feminists for problems that are caused by men. While I don’t think anyone would blame feminists for the existence of human trafficking, it is interesting to consider how the feminist stance against the regulation or legalization of prostitution can play a role in exacerbating human trafficking.
They have a strong feminist lobby arguing to know better what is good for prostitutes than prostitutes do themselves.
Conclusion: Human trafficking is a huge problem in our world, and one that is growing. Human trafficking does indeed affect more women than men. The question is what do we gain by ignoring the male victims and leaving them out of the conversation? If thinking those victims deserve a voice makes me a cave dwelling idiot, then I guess I’m a cave dwelling idiot.
Stat 2: The UN estimates that 35 per cent of women worldwide have been the victims of violence.
And of course that is a problem. But I guess the crux of the problem, from the MRA point of view, is why it’s so acceptable to always leave male victims out of the conversation, as demonstrated in the info graphic.
Most violent crimes are committed by men, around 80% and I feel like this is the justification for ignoring male victims. Almost like they are guilty by association. But the reality is that men are twice as likely to experience violence as women, and up to 4 times as likely to be murdered. And of course this is without even taking into account societal pressures that put stigmas on men to not seek help.
There seems to be some sort of feminist assumption that talking about toxic masculinity and the need for feminism is going to somehow reduce violence, which is specious to say the least. Maybe discussions about toxic masculinity can serve some purpose in getting more men to seek help and to report the crimes they suffer from, but the reality is that this type of advocacy mainly results in all the attention and funding being channeled into women only programs. We have domestic shelters
all over which service women only and men face barriers to healthcare that nobody talks about. The simple reality is that feminism doesn’t succeed in reducing violence but rather it does succeed in helping women while men are routinely left to fend for themselves.
Conclusion: Men are more at risk of violence than women, and feminism is doing nothing demonstrable to help them. Advocacy for men is needed if we want to address the problem of real world violence beyond the narrow lense of gynocentric feminism.
Stat 3: Fewer than one in 30 rape victims in the UK see their attacker convicted
So now we have stats from a developed nation, it just happens to be the one with the worst stats in Europe when it comes to rape conviction. One thing that is important to point out right away is that 40% of cases that are prosecuted result in a conviction, meaning the 7% conviction rate given is taking into account all the rapes that are never reported.
Having said that, you will get a lot more sympathy from me on this issue. I mean, insert typical rant about male victims existing and not being acknowledge, but apart from that I don’t personally have a problem with feminism advocating for rape victims, and I even admit that I think there’s a bit of a bias in the MRA movement that doesn’t do the movement any favors.
For example the article written by Elam that is referenced in the GQ article. I have no problem with Elam wanting to follow due process and give Cosby the benefit of the doubt, I really don’t, but the accusers should then be extended the same courtesy and not demonized because of baseless presumptions and obvious biases.
Rape convictions are lower than other crimes because of the nature of the crime. Proving consent is often going to be her word against his, and that is really the crux of the problem. Feminists sometimes do push some crazy ideas that are sometimes verge on a presumption of guilt, while MRA’s have a tendency to paint all accusations as false. Personally I don’t know how we can solve the issue, but wouldn’t it be great if science could come up with some sort of foolproof lie detector or truth serum? Get on that, science.
Stat 4: Women with full-time work still earn only about 77 per cent percent of their male counterparts.
Really, that old chestnut? You really have no shame, do you Rupert? In spite of being parroted by almost everyone from John Oliver to Obama, this has been debunked by actual economists. Ad nauseum. So I’m not going to regurgitate the debunking of the wage gap here because we’ve been over this, internet. Instead I’d like to draw attention to some stats that you aren’t going to hear feminists shouting from the rooftops any time soon.
Women control 51% of personal wealth in the US, about $14 trillion dollars. Women in the US make up 52% of management and professional roles now, which makes sense considering women are more likely to go to college. Women, globally, control about 70-80% of how personal wealth is spent. Yes, it’s not just a stereotype, men earn and women spend. The result of course is that we live in a world where marketing is geared towards catering to the whims of women.
Lindsay Otto, a women’s rights campaigner from Nevada, says the backlash against women’s spending ignores the fact that most men allow — and in some cases, even encourage — women in their lives to have the final say about purchases.
So what’s the answer to women controlling more wealth, getting better educations and deciding how the household money is spent? More feminism of course. More and more. Endless feminism because feminism is an industrial complex and mind control cult that must find ways to continue to justify it’s own self perpetuation. Kind of like how if you gave every American an M-16 and a bazooka the NRA would still find reasons to justify it’s continued existence, because that’s how industry works. People don’t have much tendency to pack up their cash cows and go home. Are you reading this, Rupert Myers? Is any of it getting through your pea sized brain, you fucking asshole casserole?
Conclusion: The world is full of problems and these problems affect everyone, men, women and children alike. More and more people are rejecting feminism and many are even turning to the Men’s Rights Movement because we live in an increasingly gynocentric society and the MRA’s are simply men and women trying to swing the pendulum back from it’s currently unjustifiable position.
GQ, just like Salon, Cracked, Vice, Buzefeed, Gawker, and all the rest of the online media world is simply jumping on the feminist bandwagon in a futile attempt to stay relevant in a world that no longer has any need for GQ because feminism talks and masculinity walks. You fucking miserable sellouts.