… [W]hat the study reveals is the devastating impact that careless advocacy research can have on truth. [...] Consider: In a telephone survey with a 30 percent response rate, interviewers did not ask participants whether they had been raped. Instead of such straightforward questions, the CDC researchers described a series of sexual encounters and then they determined whether the responses indicated sexual violation. A sample of 9,086 women was asked, for example, “When you were drunk, high, drugged, or passed out and unable to consent, how many people ever had vaginal sex with you?” A majority of the 1.3 million women (61.5 percent) the CDC projected as rape victims in 2010 experienced this sort of “alcohol or drug facilitated penetration.”

What does that mean? If a woman was unconscious or severely incapacitated, everyone would call it rape. But what about sex while inebriated? Few people would say that intoxicated sex alone constitutes rape — indeed, a nontrivial percentage of all customary sexual intercourse, including marital intercourse, probably falls under that definition (and is therefore criminal according to the CDC).

Sommers misses the mark in her complaint about the researchers defining what counts as a sexual violation. Many victim of abuse do not consider or see what happened to them as sexual abuse or rape. It makes sense for researchers to look at the acts on their own merits as opposed to what the respondents offer. However, Sommers is right that way the researchers went about it is so broad and ambiguous that it is possible that the numbers, particularly female victims, are inflated.

Sommers did not go into the other problem with the researchers’ definitions, namely that they excluded being forced to penetrate as rape even though all 50 states count that act as rape (or sexual assault in states that do not use “rape” in their statutes). She also did not note the issue with the age of the respondents. Most of them were in their 40s, which could have skewed the results, particularly for male victims as older men are less likely to report abuse they suffered.

This does not mean the survey is completely useless. It does provide some insight into how frequently men and women report being abused. However, it is hardly accurate and has a clear political spin to it that Sommers noted:

Why is the CDC using methods of advocacy research that are anathema to genuine social science? The answer is suggested by a posting on the White House Web site this month by Lynn Rosenthal, a presidential adviser on violence against women:

“Early in the Administration, the Vice President convened federal agencies to assess trends and identify gaps in our response to violence and abuse. We identified data collection as one of the biggest challenges we face in understanding and combatting these crime. Thanks to the hard work of [Attorney General Eric] Holder, the FBI, law enforcement leaders, and the women’s organizations who have long advocated for this change, we are one step further towards meeting that challenge.”

While that passage referred to the FBI’s recently revised definition of rape — and not the CDC survey — it shows how the study fits into the administration’s effort to apply the advocacy agenda of the women’s lobby to rape research. That would explain how feminist theory found its way into the report.

Hopefully, the survey will prompt others to conduct a less skewed study on sexual violence, perhaps with clearer questions and fairer definitions.

The day my wife beat me up because she hated my haircut — The first time my ex-wife’s temper turned from vicious insults into violence was after I’d had a haircut she didn’t like. She dragged me down the hall by my hair, punching the back of my neck. Soon after, she repeatedly hit me on the head with a telephone receiver after she didn’t approve of the way I’d spoken to my mum. And, most absurdly, she set about my shins with a child’s plastic golf club after I’d hung my underwear out to dry without folding it the right way. Did I say anything to anyone? Or leave her? No, I didn’t. For, like thousands of other male victims of domestic violence, I was mortally ashamed of what was happening to me, convinced if only I was a better husband, these attacks would stop.

Hamid Karzai condemns alleged Afghan child abuse by British soldiers — The soldiers, reportedly a sergeant and a private from the Mercian Battle Group, were arrested over claims they had made films as they encouraged a boy and a girl to touch them through their clothing, and showed the videos to their comrades. An investigation has been launched by the Royal Military Police. The allegations were made less than a week after film emerged of United States Marines urinating on the bodies of Taliban fighters killed in battle. Mr Karzai’s office said: “The government of Afghanistan is immensely disgusted by the rise in recent incidents of immoral nature among foreign soldiers that clearly undermine public confidence and the Afghan people’s co-operation with foreign troops.”

Haverstraw woman, 33, accused of sex with teen — A 33-year-old dental assistant has been charged with having sexual intercourse four times with a 15-year-old boy at her village apartment since early January, police said Friday. Police arrested Viviana Urbino on Wednesday following an investigation based upon a complaint filed by the boy’s mother. Lt. Martin Lund said Friday that the investigation found Urbino met the boy this month for the first time during a social function in the village.

Mother raped own daughter for ‘sex education’ — A mother of four who raped her 11-year-old daughter and filmed it as a form of “sex education” has been jailed for four years in Australia. The 37-year-old woman from Queensland’s Sunshine Coast made three films using her mobile phone showing her raping her youngest child and exposed her to other sexual activity “in response to repeated questions,” The Sunshine Daily reported. Judge John Robertson said sexual offenses against children by their own mothers were “rare,” describing the relationship between mother and child as “seminal in our society.” 

Priest accused of sexually abusing boys over 20 years — CATHOLIC priest Alexander Bede Walsh befriended boys ‘in awe’ of his position before sexually abusing them in swimming pools and at their family homes, a court heard. The 58-year-old, pictured right, is on trial accused of 27 counts of sexual abuse on eight boys over a 20-year period. Some of the boys were as young as seven when the incidents allegedly took place between July 1974 and December 1994. Walsh served as a priest in Cheadle for 14 years.

Priest sex trial: Boy was disgusted at ‘abuse’ by priest — A TEENAGER was so upset after being sexually abused by a priest that he tried to kill himself, a court heard. The alleged victim is one of eight people who have come forward to claim they were abused by Alexander Bede Walsh as youngsters. The alleged abuse is said to have taken place over 20 years between 1974 and 1994. Walsh, aged 58, is currently on trial at Stoke-on-Trent Crown Court facing 27 charges including indecent assault and indecency.

Sex offender, Satanist accused of abusing boy — A Murfreesboro man who is a registered sex offender has been charged with aggravated child abuse in connection with the brutal assault of his girlfriend’s 5-year-old son. Forty-year-old John “J.D.” Lotts Jr., who is a self-described member of the Church of Satan, was arrested Jan. 10 when police helped a caseworker from the Tennessee Department of Children’s Services who was investigating abuse allegations locate the child and his 23-year-old mother, Elizabeth A. Hoagland, at an apartment on Willowbrook Drive.

Woman, 48, sentenced to 30 YEARS in jail for having sex with boy, 13, who was staying in her home — A 48 year old woman has been jailed for 30 years for having sex with a 13 year old boy. Paula Sue Starr was told she will serve at least 20 years behind bars and 10 years on probation after her victim’s family called her a ‘monster’. Starr admitted having sex with the teen during the four days he was in her care in 2009. The mother of one wept in court as her victim’s mother read out an impact statement in which she described how her son’s life had been ruined. She said she son had recurring nightmares and psychological damage as a result of the sexual encounter at Starr’s home in Fort Wayne, Indiana.

Woman Rapes 16 Year Old Boy — The police in Mitooma district have arrested a 32 -year- old woman for allegedly forcing a 16-year-old boy into sex. The Police identified the woman as Flavia Kyokumuka, a resident of Katagata cell in Mitooma town council.Mitooma Police criminal investigations officer Jackson Mugisha said the accused waylaid the boy on Sunday at around 9:00pm. The victim was reportedly returning from his mother’s shop in Mitooma town. Mugisha said the woman was in the company of another man who reportedly helped her to commit the crime. He said preliminary investigations showed that the boy was grabbed by the man first and then the woman jumped on him demanding for sex.

Women Feel Pain More than Men: Study – A new study suggests that women may feel pain more intensely than men do. Using the hospital records of 11,000 patients, researchers found that there were notable differences in human pain perception between men in women across diabetes, arthritis, respiratory infections and a number of other diseases, Scientific American reported. The study, published in the Jan. 16 issue of the Journal of Pain, is the largest of its kind to analyze the differences of pain perception between the sexes. However, it’s just a baby step into understanding how pain is felt among men and women. Because pain is subjective, researchers don’t know for sure if women actually feel more pain than men – they just know women report a higher intensity of pain to their doctors.

QUESTION ONE: A man describes being raped by a woman when he was 13-years-old. Do the Manboobz regulars:

a) Respond with sympathy and support

b) Attack him and accuse him of lying about his abuse, his life experiences, and his family, then return to posting about how there is no gray area when it comes to rape and intoxication

BONUS QUESTION: True or False: Someone on Manboobz argues that no feminists ever downplay, dismiss, ignore, or marginalize male victims, and that only feminists do anything to help male victims. This same person writes this after accusing a male victim of lying about his past. 

When Anthony Zarat shared his experience of being raped at 13-years-old by a woman, he summed up how much time he thinks abusers should get:

I wound never condemn a perpetrator to more than 3 years, out in 1 with full compliance, 5 on registry for simple non-consent with no additional violence or harm. This is over done, barbaric, and fundamentally un-just.

That comment prompted several responses. Myoo challenged Anthony’s “slap on the wrist” sentencing idea. Happy and Pecunium repeatedly accused him of lying about his experiences and family. Dracula accused him of not caring about men and boys.

The irony is that this happens on a thread chastising other people for attacking, victim-blaming and disbelieving a rape victim.

Granted, I do not care that plenty of feminists only pretend to care about male victims. They are not the only people who do it, and no one is actually fooled by their charade. However, they must know that they cannot complain about people trashing a rape victim and then turn around and do it themselves.

What I find truly revealing is that not one person called anyone on this. They are so wrapped up in proving that drunk men are always responsible for the actions that these feminists attack a victim a rape of without feeling guilty or admitting that they are doing just that as they self-righteously condemn the subreddit atheist posters of doing the exact same thing.

This does not happen by accident. That level of hypocrisy takes effort. It is intentional, and it is precisely because of this kind of misandrous, victim-shaming nonsense that I am not nor will ever be a feminist.

Every month there is a report, essay, or article about how women are raped in war-torn countries, yet few of those reports mention anything about male victims. Male victimization remains a taboo subject in most countries, but more so in many Africa countries, particularly those engaged in war. Many of those cultures place such limits on men that male victims of rape cannot come forward for fear of losing their friends and family. Often the support services that help women will not help men. Should any men come forward, they also risk retaliation from the authorities, especially if the men are refugees.

All of this leads to a woeful lack of accurate data about the frequency of rape against men. It is unfathomable to think that any army that would torture and brutalize a populace would abstain from sexually assaulting men. Regardless of the social stigmas, in war no act of violence is ever used just against one group. There are thousands of boys and men who have been raped and forced to keep it secret because of social stigmas and misandrist policies that deny male victimization.

However, photographer and writer Will Storr provides a glimpse in the horrors that many men face in war-torn countries in Africa. He produced an audio slideshow recounting the stories of several men. He also wrote an article:

One of the few academics to have looked into the issue in any detail is Lara Stemple, of the University of California’s Health and Human Rights Law Project. Her study Male Rape and Human Rights notes incidents of male sexual violence as a weapon of wartime or political aggression in countries such as Chile, Greece, Croatia, Iran, Kuwait, the former Soviet Union and the former Yugoslavia. Twenty-one per cent of Sri Lankan males who were seen at a London torture treatment centre reported sexual abuse while in detention. In El Salvador, 76% of male political prisoners surveyed in the 1980s described at least one incidence of sexual torture. A study of 6,000 concentration-camp inmates in Sarajevo found that 80% of men reported having been raped.

I’ve come to Kampala to hear the stories of the few brave men who have agreed to speak to me: a rare opportunity to find out about a controversial and deeply taboo issue. In Uganda, survivors are at risk of arrest by police, as they are likely to assume that they’re gay – a crime in this country and in 38 of the 53 African nations. They will probably be ostracised by friends, rejected by family and turned away by the UN and the myriad international NGOs that are equipped, trained and ready to help women. They are wounded, isolated and in danger. In the words of Owiny: “They are despised.”

Because there has been so little research into the rape of men during war, it’s not possible to say with any certainty why it happens or even how common it is – although a rare 2010 survey, published in theJournal of the American Medical Association, found that 22% of men and 30% of women in Eastern Congo reported conflict-related sexual violence. As for Atim, she says: “Our staff are overwhelmed by the cases we’ve got, but in terms of actual numbers? This is the tip of the iceberg.”

Storr goes on to tell Jean Paul’s story. Jean Paul’s father was accused of aiding the enemy and was killed. Jean Paul ran, but was caught by the army. He was raped nearly a dozen times the first night and every night, along with several other men, for over a week. He managed to hide one day under the roots of a tree, and remained there until the searchers gave up. Jean Paul was so violently raped that even with medical treatment he still bleeds when he walks.

That is the reality of rape against men and boys. People avoid talking about what boys and men actually go through. No one wants to hear it and few would believe it, yet Storr gives an account of the kind of rape men and boys face endure. Fair warning, it is graphic: 

Men aren’t simply raped, they are forced to penetrate holes in banana trees that run with acidic sap, to sit with their genitals over a fire, to drag rocks tied to their penis, to give oral sex to queues of soldiers, to be penetrated with screwdrivers and sticks. [Makerere University's Refugee Law Project  gender officer Salome] Atim Atim has now seen so many male survivors that, frequently, she can spot them the moment they sit down. “They tend to lean forward and will often sit on one buttock,” she tells me. “When they cough, they grab their lower regions. At times, they will stand up and there’s blood on the chair. And they often have some kind of smell.”

Keep in mind, this is not the just immediately following the rapes, but several weeks or months after the assaults. When people talk about sexual violence against males, they avoid any other kind of assault than penis-in-rectum rape. Even then, people tend to present a sanitized version of it, as if rape against males is only rape because it is unwanted, not because it can and often does result in lots of damage.

To make matters worse, quite often the wives of these men will leave them if they discover their husbands were raped. Jean Paul mentioned that he feared telling his brother why he must eat soft foods because he did not want his brother to abandon him. In these cultures, men can only be strong. They cannot cry or show fear. They certainly cannot be victimized. Should that happen, they are no longer men and no one in their community will support them.

But perhaps the worst element is that human rights organizations ignore male victims. As Storr reported:

The research by Lara Stemple at the University of California doesn’t only show that male sexual violence is a component of wars all over the world, it also suggests that international aid organisations are failing male victims. Her study cites a review of 4,076 NGOs that have addressed wartime sexual violence. Only 3% of them mentioned the experience of men in their literature. “Typically,” Stemple says, “as a passing reference.”

Stemple’s findings on the failure of aid agencies is no surprise to [RLP British director Dr. Chris] Dolan. “The organisations working on sexual and gender-based violence don’t talk about it,” he says. “It’s systematically silenced. If you’re very, very lucky they’ll give it a tangential mention at the end of a report. You might get five seconds of: ‘Oh and men can also be the victims of sexual violence.’ But there’s no data, no discussion.”

As part of an attempt to correct this, the RLP produced a documentary in 2010 called Gender Against Men. When it was screened, Dolan says that attempts were made to stop him. “Were these attempts by people in well-known, international aid agencies?” I ask.

“Yes,” he replies. “There’s a fear among them that this is a zero-sum game; that there’s a pre-defined cake and if you start talking about men, you’re going to somehow eat a chunk of this cake that’s taken them a long time to bake.” Dolan points to a November 2006 UN report that followed an international conference on sexual violence in this area of East Africa.

“I know for a fact that the people behind the report insisted the definition of rape be restricted to women,” he says, adding that one of the RLP’s donors, Dutch Oxfam, refused to provide any more funding unless he’d promise that 70% of his client base was female. He also recalls a man whose case was “particularly bad” and was referred to the UN’s refugee agency, the UNHCR. “They told him: ‘We have a programme for vulnerable women, but not men.’”

Margot Wallström, the UN special representative of the secretary-general for sexual violence in conflict, objected to Dolan and Stemple’s position, stating that “the focus remains on women because they are ‘overwhelmingly’ the victims.”

Yet the above statistics suggest that men are likely raped as often as women. Again, it is unlikely that anyone who would brutalize a populace would only rape women. By deliberately framing sexual violence as something that can only happen to women, human rights groups perpetuate the violence against men and boys, forcing them to not only suffer in silence, but to remain silent to avoid the wrath of their family, community, the authorities, and military forces.

The glaring unasked question is why ignore male victims? Who benefits from pretending that no men and boys are raped? How does refusing services to boys and men literally bleeding as they walk do anything to solve the conflicts in those regions?

It is tempting to lay this at the feet of feminists. To be certain, feminism plays a role in ignoring male victims. One would be hard-pressed to find feminist literature that treats males as legitimate, equal victims of rape. More often than not sexual violence against males is framed as “male rape”, implying that it is something other than real rape. Few feminist-run organizations reach out to male victims, and when they do they often still treat male victims as second-class.

However, that is not the only factor. The other is that people are so used to violence against men and entrenched in the notion that men cannot be raped that no one really cares. Apathy is a powerful force, and Storr ends his article with an astounding example of it:

As I leave Uganda, there’s a detail of a story that I can’t forget. Before receiving help from the RLP, one man went to see his local doctor. He told him he had been raped four times, that he was injured and depressed and his wife had threatened to leave him. The doctor gave him a Panadol.

Panadol is another name for Tylenol.

In 2010, Misty Talley Smith locked two boys who were friends of her son in her son’s room. When the boys’ parents came looking for them, Smith told them the boys were not there. The boys managed to escape and were found by the police. According to a report:

It was alleged that on various occasions for about a month or two, Smith had supplied the boys with marijuana and pills. Court papers explained that she bound their hands with duct tape and had sexual contact, short of intercourse with them. It was also alleged that she had taken inappropriate photos of herself with one of the boy’s camera, and had touched the boys inappropriately beneath a blanket.

As a result, the prosecutors charged Smith with thirteen criminal charges, including two counts of delivery of drugs to minors, one of furnishing alcohol to a minor, two of lewd and lascivious conduct, one of simple assault, aggravated sexual assault, and unlawful restraint. However, the prosecutors accepted a plea deal that reduced Smith’s charges down to  two counts of sexual assault without consent.

So despite that this woman tied the boys up, sexually assaulted them (presumably physical and/or oral contact), and lied about the boys’ whereabouts, the state dropped all the serious charges against her.  Smith received three years to life, but with time served, she will actually only spend about two years in jail before being placed on furlough.

Defense lawyer Elizabeth Hibbitts argued that her client suffered from mental deficiencies stemming from fetal alcohol syndrome: 

Testimony during Tuesday’s sentencing showed that Smith had been a victim herself, and that she was found to have severe mental deficiencies. More specifically it was reported that she had been involved in abusive relationships, suffers from fetal alcohol syndrome and is borderline mentally retarded.

Psychiatrist Nash took the stand as a witness for the defense.

He said that Smith’s symptoms – problems in school, issues with the law, inappropriate sexual behavior, and employment problems – are consistent with fetal alcohol syndrome, which often causes sufferers to be confused and lack understanding of social norms.

Nash said Smith is a woman who never had a chance; her brain damage occurred in the first trimester of her development.

Judge Robert Mello agreed with this:

The court thinks that the two victims came closest to articulating what is needed here. What Ms. Smith needs is a structure that she’s never had in her life. They don’t want to see her spend her life in jail, but they realize in order for her to succeed, which they want her to do, she’s going to need very strict supervision; as much supervision as possible.

Keep in mind that Cathy St. John, who wrote the pre-sentence investigation report on Smith stated that Smith has a 78% chance of reoffending. Even though a furlough carries greater supervision than parole, the person is not necessarily monitored 24 hours a day. If this woman’s behavior is so impulsive that she needs constant supervision (she previously assaulted her son, resulting in a domestic violence charge), the better decision would be to place her in prison until she completed the necessary therapy and could be trusted not to hurt anyone else.

The irony of this is that if the boys had assaulted Smith, they would spend the next nine years in jail until they turned 21. Even if they plead out, they would not have gotten all the serious charges dropped, would not have had their time served counted, and certainly would not have been granted a furlough. And it would not matter how horribly they had been abused. They would spend their childhood in prison, assuming they were not charged as adults.

Yet when a woman kidnaps and sexually assaults two boys, and does so over several months, she walks with about two years and a furlough in which she will have to check in to her supervising officer every few hours. I do not think she needs to be locked away for life, but she certainly deserved more time than a handful of years.

One of the things a lot of young men and boys learn as they approach adulthood is that being a man is not really a positive thing. Certainly some people find value in men, especially when someone needs to be saved or tough physical labor needs to be done. Men are valued when they can provide for others, typically women, financially. Men have value when they can entertain through sports, music, acting or other popular arts.

However, in general there is nothing about being a man that is in and of itself good. There are no billboards or TV spots glorifying manhood. There are no ads stating how men inherently have certain good qualities. There are very few fund-raising events done just for the sake of helping men. Instead, boys and young men grow up hearing generally negative things about men, from deadbeat fathers to abusive husbands. They are also bombarded with TV shows, films and commercials portraying men as hapless, barely functioning, uncaring buffoons

So it is refreshing when a group, a college men’s group no less, makes an effort to raise awareness about the needs of underprivileged young men in their community. Of course, not everyone views such an effort as worthwhile, especially not when the word “man” is part of it. Jennifer Luo from Rice University paints a much bleaker picture:

The Hanszen College Men’s Resource Center (MRC) has been selling “MAN” shirts both to raise campus awareness and to raise funds for its Hu(man)ity Campaign to help “young men in the Fifth Ward Enrichment program become responsible adults and productive members of the community.” I thought it a perfect example of the kind of socially conscious civic engagement projects Rice students should engage in – that is, until I saw a shirt with the slogan “COM(MAN)D” with the word “man” displayed in a larger font and bracketed within the whole word.

Understandably, the MRC was probably trying to make a statement by using funny or enticing slogans as part of its campaign. Most of the slogans are indeed so, such as “WO(MAN),” “(MAN)GO” and “BRO(MAN)CE,” but this particular slogan, “COM(MAN)D,” is particularly offensive and potentially misleading.

“Command” is a word that connotes power, control, force and dominance. This meaning is obvious in every dictionary definition of the word. One cannot command without being obeyed. “Command” and “obey” form a basic binary opposition, just like “male” and “female.” If a man “commands,” then a man cannot “obey,” which leaves anything that is not man to “obey.”

Alas, what cannot be man? Woman. One potential argument is that the use of “man” is sexless here, which is what I had thought originally. But given the context of the people who created the shirts, in addition to the goal of helping underprivileged young men in Houston, it becomes clear that the usage of “man” takes on a gendered meaning. The concept of dichotomy here therefore becomes hierarchical in terms of gender.

To be honest, I cannot follow Luo’s logic on this. The (MAN) concept is a play off the (Product) Red line featured in GAP and its affiliate stores. Some of the past slogans featured on products were Inspi(red) and Desi(red) along with Hamme(red) and Sco(red). While one could find some of the slogans politically motivated, one would be hard pressed to conclude that GAP endorsed people getting drunk or wanted to reduce people to be racked up on a sexual score card. If one followed Luo’s logic, however, that is what one is left to conclude.

Luo makes the leap that because “command” denotes power that the MRC intended people to view the slogan COM(MAN)D as meaning man = power. That does not make much sense considering that, according to Luo, the MRC used WO(MAN) as well. If they intended anything other than to play off words that have “man” as part of the spelling, why does Luo not conclude that the MRC wanted people to think man = woman?

It seems more like Luo takes a political agenda she has and superimposes it onto the MRC campaign. She goes on to make that quite clear:

By emphasizing the noun “man” in such a strong word, this slogan exudes a sexist view of the world in which one gender is consistently associated with certain characteristics, either negative or positive. It sends a message that is not constructive to gender equality. In associating “command” with one gender, this slogan primes the viewer to associate certain qualities and positions with the male gender. In doing so draws on the chauvinistic notion that men should command while women should obey.

Some may argue that if the Women’s Resource Center (WRC) can give out shirts promoting feminism, then the Men’s Resource Center can give out shirts that empower men. But the nature of the messages promoted by the WRC is completely different from the nature of the messages promoted by the MRC. Shirts from the WRC say, “This is What a Feminist Looks Like” or “I say the ‘F’ word, Feminism.” This message is fundamentally different from one that says “COM(MAN)D.” Here, the shirts are saying that feminism is about gender equality.

Technically, they do not, because the overwhelming majority of the people who will buy such shirts will be female. The shirts also do not mention anything about equality whatsoever. If Luo views feminism as promoting gender equality, that is her perspective. The shirts, however, are a political statement akin to “Jesus Loves You.” They endorse the ideology itself without any mention or any regard to the ideology’s purported position on certain issues.

All of which has nothing to do with the MRC campaign. The campaign is based on raising awareness about men’s needs, not about promoting gender equality, which is why the campaign plays off words with “man” in their spelling. The idea is to get people to think man regardless of the other word presented, just like the (Product) Red campaign intends. Luo states that the use of “command” denotes some kind of chauvinistic notion that men ought to be in power while women should obey. However, if that were the case, why would none of the other slogans also contain that message? Why would all the other slogans simply be a play on words? More importantly, why does Luo not take issue with the MRC calling the campaign the “Hu(man)ity Campaign?” Would that not lead people to assume that man = humanity, leaving women out in the cold and somehow less than human?

Luo continues with:

Furthermore, people who already have conscious or unconscious prejudices toward women tend to gravitate to this kind of ambiguous message that verges on the edge of sexism, which in turn fosters their pre-existing bias in addition to reaffirming values that had hindered sexual equality in the first place.

Again, that is quite the leap, particularly considering she brushes off BRO(MAN)CE as funny, despite the potential reading by men with prejudices against women that they clearly can do without women. One could also argue that (MAN)GO is another prejudiced slogan suggesting that men ought to go out into the world and do things while women ought to remain at home. Every use of the word “man” can easily be twisted by Luo’s framing, turning each slogan into another feminist example of bias against women. It takes little effort to do so, although it does require a person to ignore the actual intent of the campaign.

The issue seems to be more that perhaps the campaign is working. Perhaps the MRC has managed to gather funds for underprivileged men. Perhaps the campaign is getting local notice. Perhaps it is just that the MRC is helping men instead of women. Luo says it is not:

I am by no means attacking the existence of the MRC. Groups in the Rice community have a right to foster organization for a good cause if their founders feel that certain needs or problems, such as men’s issues, are not paid enough attention to on campus.

But…

However, that organization stops being beneficial when it empowers one sex at the expense of the other and reinforces certain gender stereotypes. This is what the slogan of the “COM(MAN)D” shirt does, by priming viewers to associate the idea of power with one particular gender, a notion that has no place on this campus. Therefore, I strongly urge the MRC to stop selling the “COM(MAN)D” shirts and to be more sensitive in the framing of its messages.

I would strongly urge Luo to stop writing such articles and be more sensitive in the framing of her messages because the framing she has presented so far suggests that one ought to find the word “man” something wholly negative. I would also advise against framing men’s organizations as sexist because they used a word like “command” as part of a slogan. It would perhaps help if Luo were less sensitive about groups helping men in need. While she may not consider the MRC’s efforts genuinely valuable, it would go a long way to demonstrating the gender equality she frequently mentioned if she were less judgmental.

The “Vampire Syndrome” plays out in a myriad of ways. A person might warn a young man interested in working with kids to stay away because he is a “threat.” A therapist might gear their services for male victims towards violence prevention rather than support. A political activist group might put out advertisements featuring a little boy and the tag line “When I grow up, I will beat my wife.”

Male victims already face social stigmas about their masculinity, sexuality, and their very existence. The “Vampire Syndrome” just adds to their problems. As Dr. Richard Gartner explained in an interview: 

The overwhelming majority of young male victims will not grow up to become sexually abusive men. Still, they are often very afraid they will be, even if they don’t have any fantasies. Or they may think that their flashbacks of their own abuse are proof that they’ll be abusive or are having fantasies. All of this makes these victims afraid to tell anyone since they think they’ll be perceived as a potential abuser and not be allowed to be around children. I once spoke with a client that was afraid to tell his sons and daughters-in-law about a past abuse because he worried he’d be denied access to his grandchildren.

Dr. Gartner also noted in his interview that the “Vampire Syndrome” only applies to male victims. No one worries about female victims becoming rapists, pedophiles, or abusers. No one treats them as potentially dangerous or warns them to avoid children. To this point, when people talk about women impregnated by their rapists, they worry about those women bearing the rapist’s child, not whether the women would abuse the child.

However, while this myth only applies to males, it does not come from one source. It partly comes from homophobia. Many people believe that raping a man or boy makes turns him homosexual. Likewise, many people believe that only gay men rape other males. As a result, some conclude that if raping a boy or man makes him gay, it will also make him a predator.

It partly comes from how the professional community talks about cycles of violence. Few mention that most victims do not become abusers. Few mention that most victims who never receive treatment do not go on to abuse others. Instead, the professionals talk about cycles of violence in the broadest terms possible. They leave the impression that abused boys and men will become abusers unless people teach them not to abuse.

It also comes from how feminists frame sexual violence. Feminists control the discussion on sexual violence, and organizations like Men Can Stop Rape and The National Organization for Men Against Sexism frame sexual violence as something only men do to only women. When they do mention male victims, they often do so in the context of preventing violence against women and treating male victims — and men in general — as abusers, rapists, and enablers.

All those narratives feed the “Vampire Syndrome” myth, leading people to accept it as fact. While terrible on a general level, it wreaks havoc on male victims. Many boys and men end up viewing themselves as dangerous and untrustworthy. They may avoid touching, hugging, or playing with their own children. As Dr. Gartner noted, they may look at their memories and flashbacks as “proof” of their perversion. They may not come forward out of fear of how people may view them. They may also mistake their normal sexual interests, such as teen boy’s normal sexual attraction to other teens, as deviant.

As more male victims come forward, society will learn that many of the stigmas and myths about sexual violence against males are untrue. However, challenging the “Vampire Syndrome” cannot lie solely with male victims. As a society, we need to challenge these kinds of bigoted views because they help continue the abuse. They keep victims from coming forward, keep support providers from helping men and boys in need, keep the few victims who do become abusers from seeking help, and they make us treat abused men and boys like rapists rather than survivors.

Amber Roderick, 19, lured the 16-year-old girl to a party after meeting her in the street then joined two men in a horrific rape attack.

The victim was plied with drugs and alcohol at the home of one of the men who subsequently raped her in the bathroom. A judge heard that she was held at knifepoint during at least one of the rapes.

Joseph Lawrence, 29, brandished the blade before forcing himself on the girl and afterwards threatened to stab her in the face if she told anyone what had happened.

The court heard Roderick sexually assaulted the girl while rubbing dog shampoo over herself and also encouraged 26-year-old Patrick Maughan to abuse the innocent victim.

The teenager eventually managed to flee and the trio were arrested while still drunk from the party, but the court heard how even in police cells Roderick was heard threatening to kill her victim.

This is the problem with slaps on the wrists, particularly for female offenders. While most people charged with sex crimes do not re-offend, many of those who commit violent assaults do, and the often repeat the same thing that landed them in custody. Had Amber sentenced with more than two years and not released early, perhaps she would not have assaulted someone else. Had someone bothered to monitor her perhaps this could have been avoided.

Instead, Amber got a pass and an early release, which only allowed her to re-offend. One of the mother’s of the boys Amber assaulted warned the authorities that she thought Amber would re-offend. They paid no attention to that, and they did not tell her that Amber had been released.

For those who seem to relish the notion that female-on-male sexual violence is an essentially victimless crime, this is what the mother said her son goes through:

The mum has previously told how the attack turned her “outgoing and comical” son into a recluse who is now afraid for his life.

“He’s not the same boy,” she said.

“He sits in his room all day, playing computer games. He won’t go anywhere without someone to go with him.

“My son can’t get through a day without showering several times – he just feels dirty all the time, he feels like he can’t get clean.

“He cries all the time and we can hear him thrashing around in bed when he has nightmares – I am afraid that he will never get over that.

“The family can’t get over that.”

That hardly sounds like the negligible harm so many feminists have suggested since the CDC released its sexual violence report. It sounds like the boy was truly traumatized, which is all the more reason Amber should have received a longer sentence the first time around.

She now faces an indefinite sentence with a minimum of four years. That means that she can be released in four years in the courts decide she is no longer a threat, or she can be held until such a time comes. Given what the courts did previously, there is a good chance she will walk in four years.

When is a false allegation of rape actually rape? When a men’s rights activist warns other men how to avoid being victims of false allegations.

Manboobz tried to spin Ken Kupstis’ article about preventing false allegations into preventing rape. He claims that Ken was actually giving anti-rape advice, but Ken’s comments only read that way if one heavily edits them to remove all context, which Manboobz did.

The comments were more interesting as they reveal the disconnect feminists have with this issue. Trying to explain why men may worry about false accusations to feminists is like trying to explain to feminists why a woman having non-consensual sex with a man or boy is rape. They may agree to an extent, but they will not admit it happens and they will not attempt to understand why it is a legitimate concern for men.

While there scores of exceedingly misandrist bigotry, Holly Pervocracy provided the most curious take. She began with:

It’s worth pointing out that the DURING A FALSE ACCUSATION section is, pardon my misandrist slur, creepy as fuck. It’s basically pseudo-legal advice for abusing a woman.

Yes, talking about a man being falsely accused is exactly like giving advice for abusing a woman. Just like saying you were abused by a feminist is exactly like giving advice for raping children. Perhaps there was something in Ken’s statement that set her off. She took issue with this statement from Ken:

If your woman fights with you verbally, that can be grounds for Nuisance, especially if she’s loud enough to be overheard by neighbors.

Holly replied with:

“Careful, disagreeing with me is against the law. The law against First Degree Mouthiness.”

Except the full context of Ken’s statement is the woman may be attempting to get others to support her false claim, which is clear from his preceding comment: 

Note that if she does threaten you in this manner: “I’ll tell the police you did such and such…” you will probably want to take steps to sever all ties with her. It may have been a heat-of-the-moment threat, but she can’t ‘un-make’ it, and she’ll realize that option will always remain open to her. Calmly reply to her threat with “If you do that, you leave me no choice but to charge you with Wanton Endangerment*, making a false police report, and sue you for defamation of character.”

Holly went on to object to Ken’s statement about “smashing a phone,” but like Manboobz she edited out the part that provided context so that she could write this:

In what goddamn scenario are you smashing a phone to avoid a false accusation? That’s so clearly not what this is about.

In context, Ken stated:

As unpalatable as it may be, imagine yourself accused of misdemeanor domestic battery, and the police have been summoned. The phone call alerting them serves as probable cause to enter any establishment. Note that in many areas, interference with such a phone call…disabling the phone, for instance…can constitute a felony in itself.

If someone called the police and claimed, while you stood there, that you assaulted or threatened them, a person’s normal response would likely be to either shout over the woman so the police could hear you or try to take the phone away. I am unsure whether doing the later counts as a felony, but it can certainly count as domestic battery if you attempt to or succeed in taking or disabling the phone. And for the record, Ken never stated “smash the phone.” That was something Holly added.

Holly also took issue with this statement:

Before leaving, inform your accuser that telling a police officer that you abused her when you didn’t warrants a criminal charge of making a false police report and will be grounds for a separate lawsuit of Slander.

To which Holly replied:

In other words, try and create the MRA fantasyland of court as a “someone’s going to jail today, who will it be?” situation in which failure to secure a conviction leads directly to punishment of the accuser. Or at least convince your victim (who may be quite unsure she’s been “really abused,” as is common in people even with bruises on their faces) that she’s in that fantasyland.

Where did the bruises come from? Ken never mentioned any bruises. What he actually stated was:

If she refuses to leave, it may be in your best interest to leave the area, even if it’s your own domicile, before the police arrive. Take whatever you can with you; your wallet, house and car keys at the very least. Before leaving, inform your accuser that telling a police officer that you abused her when you didn’t warrants a criminal charge of making a false police report and will be grounds for a separate lawsuit of Slander. If she or the officers in question make a written statement accusing you of battery, there will be an additional lawsuit for Libel. This warning in itself may be enough to convince her to withdraw the accusation, but if the police are en route they will probably follow through with an investigation anyway.

Perhaps in Holly’s world women never make false accusation. In the real world, plenty of women make false accusations. Many of them do not realize that they can be charged for making false accusations and they can be sued for defamation. Ken’s advice is pretty good in this regard. Telling someone who wants to falsely claim you abused her that she can be held civilly and criminally responsible may deter her from making those charges.

One place where Holly does get it kind of right is her response to Ken’s claim that warrants must be “fresh.” As Holly noted, warrants do not just go away. Warrants remain “fresh” unless the person is arrested, the prosecutor requests for it be revoked, or a judge revokes it. This is why people can be arrested years later on “outstanding” warrants.

However, Holly jumps right back to misrepresenting Ken’s comments. Ken stated:

There is a possibility that, by communicating calmly and reasonably with the officers, you can convince them that the dispute is not or should not be treated as a domestic situation. This possibility is unfortunately slight. Flattery and bribery generally don’t work and should not be attempted. Apologies, however, have been known to work. “I’m sorry you were put to all this trouble, I know you’re just doing your jobs, but I really would rather not answer any questions without a lawyer present.”

Holly then stated:

This is pretty much Abuser 101 here. Nothing about this advice requires the accusation to be false.

Again, the comment is out of context. Here is the parapgraph before it:

Once the police begin asking questions, it is in fact an interrogation. Keep your voice audible, but calm and low. Memorize the time, the location, and the names and badge numbers of the officers. Police are looking for any evidence that a crime is committed, so even sarcasm will work against you (“Oh yeah, just look at her, I beat her to a pulp, that’s why she doesn’t have a hair out of place.”).

Ken’s advice is simply that if you do not behave as a normal person would who is being falsely accused of a crime would, by say vigorously saying that she is lying, perhaps the police might actually listen to your side of the story. If that does not work, you should refrain from talking until you have a lawyer.

Holly is correct that nothing in the advice is specific to being falsely accused, but that does not change that it was given as part of general advice on how to deal with false accusations. Holly’s response is like someone saying that only a guilty person would ask for a lawyer. No, if the context of the discussion is avoiding being suckered into signing a false confession, then it is solid advice to tell someone not to talk to the police without a lawyer.

This is not to say that some of Ken’s advice is not ludicrous. Some of what he wrote is out there. However, only one of things that Holly took issue with was off. The rest was just her, like many feminists, playing the “false accusations never happen, and any man who claims it does is a rapist” game. That stupid, bigoted nonsense has the same impact as the “men are never raped” crap that comes from feminists: It keeps the victims of those crimes from coming forward and from being taken seriously. Of course, that may be the intent.

I imagine this survey will either anger feminists or feminists will completely ignore it:

One in 10 adults has been falsely accused of domestic violence, child abuse, or sexual assault, according to a survey conducted by Stop Abusive and Violent Environments (SAVE). The survey also found a strong disparity between the number of males and females falsely accused: more than three quarters of all false accusations are levied against men. Nearly seven in 10 false accusers are female.

The survey is the first of its kind to be undertaken, and uncovers distressing trends within the American abuse-reduction system.

Child abuse is the commonest false charge — about twice as many people have been falsely accused of child abuse as of domestic violence or sexual assault. In over one quarter of cases, the false allegations were made in a child custody case.

SAVE lists the results on its website:

• One in six of the respondents personally knew someone who has been falsely accused of domestic violence, child abuse, or sexual assault
• About twice as many persons have been falsely accused of child abuse as domestic violence or sexual abuse
• Three-quarters of the falsely accused persons were male
• Nearly seven in 10 of the accusers were female
• In over a quarter of the cases,  the accusation was made as part of a child custody dispute
• Nearly one in 10 – 9.7% — of respondents said they themselves had been falsely accused of abuse

While the survey is not necessarily representative of the general population, it does show that false accusations are not as rare as some people believe. Unfortunately, the survey does not report how many of these cases involved arrests or charges, nor does it go into why the accusations were made. The information would go a long way in helping people to understand this problem.

Nevertheless, the survey’s results do justify the concern some groups have about false accusations, and should prompt people to take those concerns more seriously rather than mocking them.