Men’s violence against women and girls is a national emergency

[tardigrade]

So you'd set up your own school?

I wouldn't need to. Home schooling can be done anywhere.

 

[tardigrade]

What outside influences?

TV, media, social, media etc.

 

[Pickman's model]

TV, media, social, media etc.

Not to mention books and art

 

[existentialist]

I wouldn't need to. Home schooling can be done anywhere.

Of course, home schooling will insulate children from the malign influence of other kids...but it also deprives them of the moderating influence of other kids. Can we be so sure that every home schooler is possessed of the highest motives and most laudable outlooks?

 

[tardigrade]

Not to mention books and art

I wouldn't deprive them of creativity.

 

[kabbes]

True, but I think that's a little extreme, not to let them have friends. If I had children, I would home school them, and get in touch with other parents who were doing the same. Then the children could mix with each other, without all the outside influences that are so damaging. Of course, that's assuming the other parents are trying to do the same for their kids!

The big assumption you’re making here is that you’re somehow less likely to reproduce the culture that underlies all… <gestures > this… than the school is. But to achieve that, you’ll have need to have been through a really deep reflective journey. You’ve been thoroughly socialised into a culture that contains men are more important as an embedded part of its structures of social dominance. You’ll reproduce those systems of dominance every day in your talk, in your acts, in your rituals and practices, in the way you tell your stories, in the information you pay attention to, in the information you choose to share, you name it. If you think you don’t then all that proves is that you haven’t performed any self-reflection at all.

Thinking we’re somehow ‘outside’ the culture, like culture is a window we can choose to look through or not, or a hat we can discard in private, is the best way to ensure that the culture is mindlessly reproduced.

 

[tardigrade]

Of course, home schooling will insulate children from the malign influence of other kids...but it also deprives them of the moderating influence of other kids. Can we be so sure that every home schooler is possessed of the highest motives and most laudable outlooks?

Well, that's what I said in my previous post. I'd want to make sure that other home schooler's are on the same wavelength. I disagree that home schooled kids are deprived in any way, as long as they have a large circle of friends.

 

[ElizabethofYork]

Well, that's what I said in my previous post. I'd want to make sure that other home schooler's are on the same wavelength. I disagree that home schooled kids are deprived in any way, as long as they have a large circle of friends.

But their friends would all be from a similar background, with parents who have similar opinions and beliefs. I think it's important for children to learn how to deal with people from very different backgrounds and experiences, while having the confidence to stand up for their own values.

 

[tardigrade]

You’ve been thoroughly socialised into a culture that contains men are more important as an embedded part of its structures of social dominance. You’ll reproduce those systems of dominance every day in your talk, in your acts, in your rituals and practices, in the way you tell your stories, in the information you pay attention to, in the information you choose to share, you name it.

I would be very mindful of what was taught and how it was presented. Obviously, some of the toxicity would leak through, but at least I'd be trying to make a difference.

 

[krtek a houby]

Whoosh.

ok, cheers

 

[Red Cat]

Even many of those who conform are bullied

It's a feature of capitalism, as with other violence.

Is violence less in more egalitarian societies?

 

[tardigrade]

But their friends would all be from a similar background, with parents who have similar opinions and beliefs. I think it's important for children to learn how to deal with people from very different backgrounds and experiences, while having the confidence to stand up for their own values.

Not necessarily. Yes, there would be a similar outlook among the parents, but their backgrounds and experiences are going to be different.

 

[tardigrade]

I was asking for other's opinions on how they would bring, or have brought up, their children to not have negative views on the roles of men and women.

 

[kabbes]

I would be very mindful of what was taught and how it was presented. Obviously, some of the toxicity would leak through, but at least I'd be trying to make a difference.

All you're doing with that statement is showing that you are not mindful of the cultural structures that reproduce the current state of affairs. You're not reassuring me that you'd somehow produce a child that is free from patriarchal assumptions, you're doing the very opposite.

 

[tardigrade]

All you're doing with that statement is showing that you are not mindful of the cultural structures that reproduce the current state of affairs. You're not reassuring me that you'd somehow produce a child that is free from patriarchal assumptions, you're doing the very opposite.

OK, so how would you bring a child up to be free as possible from patriarchal assumptions?

 

[kabbes]

It's a feature of capitalism, as with other violence.

Is violence less in more egalitarian societies?

Capitalism is certainly inherently solipsistic, since it replaces the joint intentionality, and hence communality, that would otherwise be necessary in order to prioritise resources with rules for organising the exchange of abstract commodities. Consequently, I don't need to understand your project and how that might be of benefit to you, me and society, I only need to know that I am willing to pay more for the same thing than you are. Symbolic violence is immanent in this solipsism.

 

[kabbes]

OK, so how would you bring a child up to be free as possible from patriarchal assumptions?

I think I've already spoken at length about that subject. You seem to want a bullet-point list, though. Some kind of checklist of worthiness that you can conform to. But culture doesn't work like that. The self is constructed dialogically in constant consideration of Other. And that goes for your child too. The way that they understand how the world works comes from the practices that they engage in, and that starts (but definitely doesn't end) with the practices of the parent. If you want to minimise patriarchal assumptions, you have to start with how everything you do is saturated in them.

 

[purenarcotic]

With difficulty. Because we live in the world we live in and it is impossible to avoid it in totality. We can encourage children to think critically, question norms, proactively counter the messages through conversations, literature, through buying a range of toys etc, but it’s naive to think we can completely avoid it IMO.

 

[mojo pixy]

I forgot to say something earlier: an academic study of gender relations once employed two actors and used hidden cameras to film the public's reaction to a couple arguing.

When the man was verbally abusive to the woman and she was "crying", quite a few people intervened to check that she was okay. But when the woman was abusive to the man, no one intervened on his behalf.

Quite old now but there's a daily mail article about one experiment (I'm not linking to the mail but there's an archived version here and the video itself is here )

Then there's a BBC article about a similar experiment. Same result each time, strangers are more likely to intervene if it's a man abusing a woman but more likely to victim-blame (or even enjoy the spectacle) if it's a woman abusing a man.

Anyway it is heartening to see people will at least intervene if they see a woman being attacked.

I recall an experience in maybe 2008 or so when I was in Morrisons at Shepherds Bush and there was a large bloke screaming at and smacking a (his own, I guessed) small child. Lots of people around but nobody intervened except ultimately, me. Obviously he yelled at me it was none of my business but he did at least stop (and drag the child away angrily). Not a lot else I could do, but it's not the only time I've seen a child being abused in public and nobody stepping in.

So yeah, kids too. People in my experience often won't intervene in public abuse by a parent of their child. Which is pretty shameful. I expect alongside the epidemic of abuse of women, there's a vast hidden one taking place of abuse of children, who even more than adult partners are treated as property to do with as we wish.

 

[Aladdin]

The idea that women should learn self defence to protect themselves from violence is frankly nuts. It says that women should be responsible for their own safety...this in light of the appalling violence that women experience, often from their own husbands/boyfriends/ families is grossly deluded and in itself quite misogynistic.

I would like to see the report in full. Does it describe or show the data outlining who the transgressions were? Does it analyse that data? Because therein will lie any potential solution to this awful issue.

I suspect that many of the women will have been victims of domestic / partner violence. And it would not surprise me to see data showing that drugs or alcohol will have been involved in a substantial number of cases.

But telling a woman to go learn self defence is not the amswer...When many of the women will have been victims of repeated violence, coersion, emotional abuse.. and may have children to protect aswell..
Having safe houses is really important. Places where victims can escape to and be protected.
Arresting and prosecuting violent individuals. Intensive and long term counselling for victims. Equally there needs to be counselling or some intervention for perpetrators to bring them to an understanding of their own violence and work out why they have resorted to violence and why and how they must stop.

Education needs to have input in this as future generations must learn that violence against women and children is not acceptable in any way. But more than education...the lesson needs to be experienced in real life too. Children need positive male role models. This may come down to communities working to ensure that young boys, whose fathers are absent or erratically involved in their lives, are supported and experience positive male role models who respect women. The idea that male kids are exposed to the likes of the Tate brothers...really shows how social media can negatively infiltrate society and influence young minds.
Every misogynistic and violent comment promoting any coersion and or violence towards women needs to be removed and challenged. Those who post misogynistic comments promoting violence against women should be tracked.

If anyone is really serious about stopping violence against women they need to go to the source and work from there...ie the perpetrator...and the young kid who exhibits violent language / thoughts / actions towards women. Starting at school age.

 

[Aladdin]

With difficulty. Because we live in the world we live in and it is impossible to avoid it in totality. We can encourage children to think critically, question norms, proactively counter the messages through conversations, literature, through buying a range of toys etc, but it’s naive to think we can completely avoid it IMO.

And even with all that...there will be young boys who will grow to become violent towards women.
The absence of a good male role model who respects women fully, in young people's lives is massively important.

 

[Red Cat]

OK, so how would you bring a child up to be free as possible from patriarchal assumptions?

Children aren't to be moulded.

You have conversations, that's the best you can do. Talk about how you see the world, be open about the contradictions in your thinking, talk about not knowing and not having the answers.

It would be great if schools did this too, but they don't because our system of education is highly hierarchical and doesn't recognise the capacity for children to think and feel and problem solve.

 

[tardigrade]

I think I've already spoken at length about that subject. You seem to want a bullet-point list, though. Some kind of checklist of worthiness that you can conform to. But culture doesn't work like that. The self is constructed dialogically in constant consideration of Other. And that goes for your child too. The way that they understand how the world works comes from the practices that they engage in, and that starts (but definitely doesn't end) with the practices of the parent. If you want to minimise patriarchal assumptions, you have to start with how everything you do is saturated in them.

You seem more interested in telling me what I already know. I am more than aware of the influences that affect us all. I have insight, understanding and don't need a lecture from you.

 

[JimW]

I think it is possible to build our own cultures against the mainstream, it happens all the time, but of course it's not a pure process and you'd imagine really deeply ingrained things like gender roles would be much harder to change than, say, blind acceptance of some current regime.

 

[tardigrade]

Children aren't to be moulded.

You have conversations, that's the best you can do. Talk about how you see the world, be open about the contradictions in your thinking, talk about not knowing and not having the answers.

It would be great if schools did this too, but they don't because our system of education is highly hierarchical and doesn't recognise the capacity for children to think and feel and problem solve.

Who mentioned 'moulding' children? An alternative way to bring them up isn't moulding them.

i agree that schools are far too regimental in the way they teach, and limited in what they teach.

 

[kabbes]

Quite old now but there's a daily mail article about one experiment (I'm not linking to the mail but there's an archived version here and the video itself is here )

Then there's a BBC article about a similar experiment. Same result each time, strangers are more likely to intervene if it's a man abusing a woman but more likely to victim-blame (or even enjoy the spectacle) if it's a woman abusing a man.

Anyway it is heartening to see people will at least intervene if they see a woman being attacked.

I recall an experience in maybe 2008 or so when I was in Morrisons at Shepherds Bush and there was a large bloke screaming at and smacking a (his own, I guessed) small child. Lots of people around but nobody intervened except ultimately, me. Obviously he yelled at me it was none of my business but he did at least stop (and drag the child away angrily). Not a lot else I could do, but it's not the only time I've seen a child being abused in public and nobody stepping in.

So yeah, kids too. People in my experience often won't intervene in public abuse by a parent of their child. Which is pretty shameful. I expect alongside the epidemic of abuse of women, there's a vast hidden one taking place of abuse of children, who even more than adult partners are treated as property to do with as we wish.

The results of experiments are what they are but how you interpret those results can be highly contested. I wouldn't locate this as individualised beliefs or dispositions so much as a combination of meaning-making within social contexts and the norming of certain responses that make it taboo to intervene in some situations rather than others. I'll leave it there, because it's not really the thread for this, but there is a great textual analysis of eyewitnesses to the James Bulger murder that demonstrates the point.

https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/70731.pdf

 

[tardigrade]

With difficulty. Because we live in the world we live in and it is impossible to avoid it in totality. We can encourage children to think critically, question norms, proactively counter the messages through conversations, literature, through buying a range of toys etc, but it’s naive to think we can completely avoid it IMO.

I'm not naive enough to think that children can be brought up in a bubble and avoid all negative influences.

 

[kabbes]

I'm not naive enough to think that children can be brought up in a bubble and avoid all negative influences.

You're naive enough to think that the world divides into negative and positive influences.

 

[tardigrade]

The idea that women should learn self defence to protect themselves from violence is frankly nuts. It says that women should be responsible for their own safety...this in light of the appalling violence that women experience, often from their own husbands/boyfriends/ families is grossly deluded and in itself quite misogynistic.

Here we go again. My opinion, according to you is 'nuts' and 'mysoynistic'. It appears that some people can't have a conversation without resorting to insults. My opinion is just that, my opinion. I'm not asking anybody to agree with it, I frankly don't care if you do.

 

[Red Cat]

Who mentioned 'moulding' children? An alternative way to bring them up isn't moulding them.

i agree that schools are far too regimental in the way they teach, and limited in what they teach.

I think many people overestimate their influence on children by focusing on what children are 'taught'.

Children need experience of working things out, not being 'taught' or given information.