Poll: Isn't this kind of sexist?

[Use_Imagination_here]

So I happen to be watching reruns of oprah, mostly because I had nothing alse to do. Ok, entirely because I had nothing to do but anyway, the issue addressed in the episode is the abuse and/or murder of WOMEN by their MALE boyfriends/husbands and exes.

I started thinking, why is it MALE?

What's the point of making it very clear that men beating up they're girlfriends is an issue (and it is), and simultaneously completely ignoring that there's even a possibility of it happening the other way around.

And before you say that it's because it happens mostly to women, A: There's no definite proof of that and B: I don't really see how that changes the issue unless women beating men is an extremely small less than 1% minority in these cases.

Doesn't this just really help reinforce a harmful view in society that women could never bring harm to men?

Edit: Would you people please stop complaining to me that I didn't provide exact numbers, those wouldn't add to either either the question or the point im making. If you care so much you look it up.

 

[KeyMaster45]

Because it's Oprah, and the audience she caters to and targets is predominantly women. It's not strange at all that the topic of her show would be spun to catch the attention of women specifically.

 

[Dags90]

Because it's Oprah, and the audience she caters to and targets is predominantly women. It's not strange at all that the topic of her show would be spun to catch the attention of women specifically.

Pretty much this. Also, the CDC has found that women are over three time more likely to experience domestic violence than men.[footnote]https://www.ncjrs.gov/txtfiles1/nij/181867.txt[/footnote]

Honestly, I find domestic violence among the LGBT community (both among men and women) to be more interesting and glossed over.

 

[Vicarious Reality]

Well uh, are you really questioning the ''common knowledge'' that men are more agressive than women?
Pretty sure i saw an article of a local woman stabbing their husband in the local paper a while ago.

 

[Chemical Alia]

a great majority of women don't take responsibility for their actions.

Well, I'm glad I don't know you in person.

 

[JochemDude]

I love how a great majority of women don't take responsibility for their actions.

That's crossing the line between a opinion and a sexist insult.

 

[Use_Imagination_here]

So I happen to be watching reruns of oprah, mostly because I had nothing alse to do. Ok, entirely because I had nothing to do but anyway, the issue addressed in the episode is the abuse and/or murder of WOMEN by their MALE boyfriends/husbands and exes.

I started thinking, why is it MALE?

What's the point of making it very clear that men beating up they're girlfriends is an issue (and it is), and simultaneously completely ignoring that there's even a possibility of it happening the other way around.

And before you say that it's because it happens mostly to women, A: There's no definite proof of that and B: I don't really see how that changes the issue unless women beating men is an extremely small less than 1% minority in these cases.

Doesn't this just really help reinforce a harmful view in society that women could never bring harm to men?

A: Did you even look? First google hit for 'Domestic abuse statistics':
http://www.ncadv.org/files/DomesticViolenceFactSheet%28National%29.pdf

85% of domestic abuse victims are women. So unless you have something countering the plethora of sources they cite your claim that there is no definite proof is quite flimsy.

B: And why does it need to be less than 1%? One is a bigger problem than the other. Nearly 8 times as common. So what is the problem with focusing on the bigger problem? You're the one that took focusing on the bigger problem as saying the smaller one never happens.

Let me ask you something, whos more likely to report that their partner is abusing him/her, a man or a woman?

That's what I meant by "no definite proof".

And the problem is that by neglecting to mention the other group you give the impression that it almost never happens to the other group. over 15 percent isn't almost never.

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

And before you say that it's because it happens mostly to women,

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2010/sep/05/men-victims-domestic-violence

>40% male. And that's not accounting for same gender DV.

"6% of women and 4% of men reported having experienced domestic abuse in the past year, equivalent to an estimated one million female victims of domestic abuse and 600,000 male victims".

"Their plight is largely overlooked by the media, in official reports and in government policy, for example in the provision of refuge places ? 7,500 for females in England and Wales but only 60 for men."

As a society, we've been trained to see violence against women as deplorable and violence against men as tolerable.

For violent individuals, there often is no distinction of gender. Both genders are equally susceptible to be abuser or abusee.

Law and Media constantly project that violence is primarily a male prerogative though, endangering both genders equally. It's not their greatest misnomer, but it's certainly up there with the more damaging tropes.

 

[Sutter Cane]

So apparently because males being abused happens less often means that it isn't worth talking about? Abuse is wrong and should be stopped no matter who is the victim.

 

[Use_Imagination_here]

And before you say that it's because it happens mostly to women,

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2010/sep/05/men-victims-domestic-violence

>40% male. And that's not accounting for same gender DV.

That doesn't refute anything I said.

 

[Use_Imagination_here]

So I happen to be watching reruns of oprah, mostly because I had nothing alse to do. Ok, entirely because I had nothing to do but anyway, the issue addressed in the episode is the abuse and/or murder of WOMEN by their MALE boyfriends/husbands and exes.

I started thinking, why is it MALE?

What's the point of making it very clear that men beating up they're girlfriends is an issue (and it is), and simultaneously completely ignoring that there's even a possibility of it happening the other way around.

And before you say that it's because it happens mostly to women, A: There's no definite proof of that and B: I don't really see how that changes the issue unless women beating men is an extremely small less than 1% minority in these cases.

Doesn't this just really help reinforce a harmful view in society that women could never bring harm to men?

A: Did you even look? First google hit for 'Domestic abuse statistics':
http://www.ncadv.org/files/DomesticViolenceFactSheet%28National%29.pdf

85% of domestic abuse victims are women. So unless you have something countering the plethora of sources they cite your claim that there is no definite proof is quite flimsy.

B: And why does it need to be less than 1%? One is a bigger problem than the other. Nearly 8 times as common. So what is the problem with focusing on the bigger problem? You're the one that took focusing on the bigger problem as saying the smaller one never happens.

Let me ask you something, whos more likely to report that their partner is abusing him/her, a man or a woman?

That's what I meant by "no definite proof".

And the problem is that by neglecting to mention the other group you give the impression that it almost never happens to the other group. over 15 percent isn't almost never.

So you lack any real proof, you just have a guess. Sorry, that's not particularly acceptable. "Oh your study is wrong because I have a random guess that you may have already accounted for, but I was too lazy to look!". Besides, for it NOT to be the majority of women you'd have to have massive amounts of under reporting. Where's your proof of that?

No, it doesn't give that impression.

I'm sorry, I wasn't aware making assumptions based on rational thinking was forbidden when arguing. Your absolutely right, I'm sorry.

Do the world a favour, google the definition of guess.

 

[Nathan Crumpler]

I haven't seen the episode, considering that I do not watch Oprah, but I think Oprah just wanted to have an episode about a specific topic and the topic she chose was men abusing their wives/girlfriends. I believe Tyra Banks had an episode about women abusing their husbands/boyfriends.

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

A: Did you even look? First google hit for 'Domestic abuse statistics':
http://www.ncadv.org/files/DomesticViolenceFactSheet%28National%29.pdf

85% of domestic abuse victims are women.

That's a very biased study. I'd invite you to look very closely at Intimate Partner Violence,
1993-2001 - where the 85% figure comes from.

It categorically states that no (as in NONE) rapes/sexual assault occurred against men in 2001.

Pardon me if I find that slightly...unbelievable.

From the same sheet: 1,247 women and 440 men were killed by an intimate partner in 2000.

Even with basic maths, that's not 85%.

 

[Gigano]

No, it's adjusting the content of the program to what'll draw the best ratings among the demographic it's aimed at.

Sometimes you discuss part of an issue without also discussing every other aspect of it. That's all that's going on here, it has absolutely nothing to do with "sexism" - the view that one gender is superior to the other - in any way or form.

Guess we can soon add "sexism" to the list of claims that should be viewed with extreme scepticism due to preposterous unfounded use.