Oh Dear…

Hugo Schwyzer does not like my Good Men Project article. According to his twitter feed, my article is “Most dishonest thing I’ve see at @goodmenproject: ‘Women Rape Boys Too’ … Conflates rape stats with other abuse stats.”

I am not sure how I conflated rape statistics with other abuse statistics given that all the examples were specifically about sexual abuse. The editors on GMP did not include the links to the studies and articles, but I did include them in my version of the post. Anyone who reads them would see that I am not confusing physical or emotional abuse with sexual abuse.

It is rather egregious to accuse me of deliberately misrepresenting statistics without citing a single example of me doing so. Obviously Schwyzer could not do that on twitter, but he did not cite anything in his response on GMP either.  It takes little effort to accuse someone of lying, but I think a person should invest some time in proving that claim if they going to go on a twitter rant over it. 

Granted, I am not surprised by Schwyzer’s reaction. In a previous exchange he dismissed the Long-Term Consequences of Childhood Sexual Abuse by Gender of Victim study as “an outlier” without, to my knowledge, ever reading the study. I am surprised, however, that he so readily contradicted himself in his response to me. He stated:

Women rape boys, and it is awful. It is also comparatively rare. And though we can presume some degree of underreporting from boys, that underreporting cannot be quantified. What can be quantified makes it clear that the overwhelming percentage of sexual predators are men, and the overwhelming percentage of victims are women.

As I wrote on GMP, if we can presume there is underreporting but we cannot quantify it, how can we then quantify who commits most abuse and who experiences most abuse when that is based on how many victims report abuse?  How can you know that the overwhelming majority victims are female when you acknowledge that you do not know how frequently males are abused? How can you know that the overwhelming majority of abusers are male when you acknowledge that an quantifiable number of victims do not report their abuse?

Schwyzer seems to draw conclusions as he admits he does not have enough information to draw those conclusions. On twitter, he asserted that the NVAWS study that RAINN cites is basically infallible fact that he will not question unless RAINN repudiates the study. (For the record, the NVAWS study did not include questions about the sex of the abuser or questions that focused on types of “envelopment” rape, i.e. rape in which the victim is forced to penetrate the abuser. To use that study as unquestionable fact is at best misleading.)

What I find curious about Schwyzer’s response is that he appears to take the rate of women’s sexual violence against boys as an attack on female victims, as if saying boys are victims more often than we think means that women are victimized less often than the research reports. Violence does not work that way. Two different groups can experience similar levels of violence simultaneously. Both males and females can have high rates of abuse.

Yet Schwyzer seems bent on women being the victims of sexual violence, and that view is not limited to him. Many feminists share it, but in Schwyzer’s case he is holding to that view while looking at research that shows his view is wrong. It is akin to someone claiming that babies come from storks as they watch a woman give birth.

When people ask why I have such a problem with feminism, it is because of the dogma and doctrine that would lead an intelligent, educated man to dismiss research just because it does not fit his political views.

We have no idea how frequently boys are victims of abuse or how often women abuse. Part of that is because our society treats this as a non-issue. Part of that is because victims do not come forward. Part of that is because the professionals never bother to ask. And part of that is because people already assume to know who the victims and abusers are.  We cannot begin to prevent sexual violence until we accept that what we think is true may not be true.


44 thoughts on “Oh Dear…

  1. TS: Violence does not work that way.

    It does work that way if you think it’s a zero-sum game *

    *Buh-but feminist’s DON’T think equality is a zero-sum game!! They don’t! They don’t! They really really don’t!

  2. Hey, great job on the Good Men Project article. Given that Hugo Schwyzer is not merely indifferent to women’s sexual abuse of boys but- as he showed with the Sarkozy affair- an outright apologist for it, I can’t say I expected any better of him.

    I’m occasionally tempted, when I’m reminded of feminists like Schwyzer, to take a page from their book and start prefacing any reference I make to the murder or attempted murder of women or girls with a reminder that the great majority of homicide victims are, of course, male. It’s true, after all- in fact, it’s much more solidly demonstrated to be true than the claim that most victims of sexual violence or female or that most perpetrators are male. I’d just like to see how long it would take for someone of Schwyzer’s ilk to accuse me of seeking to trivialize or condone violence against women.

  3. Pingback: Oh Dear… « Toy Soldiers – What Is Abuse

  4. Hugo’s in a no win situation ultimately. His “knowledge” is based in politics rather than direct experience of abuse or exposure to victims. The victims, themselves, have surpassed him in knowledge and sophistication and, given his behaviour toward them previously, now view his every word as hubris. The level of moderation applied on his previous GMP piece should be viewed for what it is – a demonstration of the inadequacy of his positions and his ability to argue them. They had to protect him.

    I found Hugo’s comment about conflating “physical abuse statistics with sexual abuse statistics” to be quite “disingenuous” in itself. To that point sexual abuse had been the primary ingredient. If he really wants to steer things away from female perpetration that’s exactly the wrong direction.

    Hugo’s getting out of his depth and it’s starting to show. I suspect pretty soon he’ll start fading away.

  5. He says that rape (or abuse, I forget) of boys is underreported and is, thus, not quantifiable. You had a good response to that (in that, if it is unquantifiable, he can’t say whether its is women or men who abuse more).

    I find it funny though that most feminists have no difficulty quantifying the likelihood that women will be raped (1 in 6, he says), when they openly acknowledge that a lot of women don’t report rape. Somehow, it is suddenly quantifiable.

    Of course, if he thinks RAINN is respectable, I should not expect any better of him.


  6. Hugo’s getting out of his depth and it’s starting to show. I suspect pretty soon he’ll start fading away.

    I doubt that. He and Lisa Hickey, the publisher of The Good Men Project Magazine, are considering contacting an expert in the field of childhood sexual abuse to explain the “variations” in the statistics. I think my article, or rather GMP posting it, legitimately pissed him off, which I find quite amusing. He could just as easily ignore the article and move on, but it seemed to have gotten under his skin to the point that he wants to prove me wrong. That is sad, and speaks to the bias at play.

    To Lisa’s credit, she wants to continue the discussion about abuse against boys and men. Hopefully, my article will prompt others, including some working for the magazine, to write about this issue. It needs to be talked about.

  7. “but it seemed to have gotten under his skin”

    His response is why I say he’s getting out of his depth. He may not fade away as I suggest but it will only be because he’s propped up by others such as GMP.

  8. Hold. The. Fuck. Up.

    HS has the nerve to call someone else’s material dishonest? Is this the same HS that basically defended a woman that may have been committing paternity fraud under the guise that a dad shouldn’t get caught up in the DNA?

    I think my article, or rather GMP posting it, legitimately pissed him off, which I find quite amusing. He could just as easily ignore the article and move on, but it seemed to have gotten under his skin to the point that he wants to prove me wrong. That is sad, and speaks to the bias at play.
    Considering his track record of ignoring dissenting voices I’m a bit shocked that he’s gunning for you on this one. My only guess is that this isn’t just a comment on a post but rather an entire post that confronts his BS and he can’t handle it.

  9. the funny part about this is that it truly shows that men and women are equals. Its just not the kind of “equality” that feminism tends to focus on.

  10. My only guess is that this isn’t just a comment on a post but rather an entire post that confronts his BS and he can’t handle it.

    What I find sad about his response was the “boys can’t be victims” tone. His twitter spat with James was much worse. I keep thinking about what happened to my cousin several years ago when a rape counselor slammed him for saying he was abused by a woman. That one incident made my cousin avoid taking classes with female teachers in high school. That is the impact that kind of statement can have, so to see someone so concerned about female victims wield that weapon with no hesitation against male victims is disheartening, but not unexpected.

  11. “Hugo’s getting out of his depth and it’s starting to show. I suspect pretty soon he’ll start fading away.”

    This gets to the heart of it. he won’t fade away becauwe there is a market for the crap he peddles, but he is a joke as a scholar, and remember, that’s what he supposely does for a living.
    He’s not much of a scholar. I googell him once just to see what he had published. His scholarly CV is thinner than mine and I have none. He should not be teaching at the level he is, and that’s pretty low already.

    He may always have a market for his crap, but maybe the days of being taking seriously as some kind of gender expert are coming to a close. His rape apologism should do it..

  12. The reason TS gets under his skin is because TS is the thing that Schwyzer is so adamant cannot occur (or rather, cannot occur enough to be taken seriously) he’s a man who was victimized by a woman. He represents the exact antithesis of everything Schwyzer holds to be true, that women are victims and men are their victimizers in this world.

    Schwyzer, as near as I can tell, can’t see the world in grey. This is how his world works. Oh he will admit that sometimes women can abuse men (or rather boys, I don’t think I’ve ever seen him admit that women can abuse full grown men) but only under duress, and only because he absolutely has to.

    I think his days of being taken seriously are fairly numbered too, I mean the guys writing for jezebel for god’s sake.

  13. Why all the certainty about his impending irrelevance?

    Hugo says exactly what feminists want to hear, times three. They will continue quoting his stuff for years to come.

  14. Toy Soldier, try not to pay so much heart to Hugo.

    We, including you, already know he’d rather preach propaganda about how women are the only victims, men their oppressors. It’d be like pulling all his teeth out to get him to admit that he’s wrong about how the issue of men or boys being abused by women isn’t important since it happens rarely.

    I’ve pretty much concluded he’d rather stick with his built-in audience of followers than bother to consider other points of view without getting ticked off.

  15. OT…re Ensler’s HuffPo piece

    Just leaving this here for safekeeping…

    @Huffington Post moderators.

    In over fifteen hundred posts Huffington Post has, I believe, permitted one mention of the Vagina Monologs promotion of rape committed by women as “good” rape.

    A quarter of the victims of child sexual abuse have their experience cast in this way on a more than daily basis and to millions and millions of people but you are not permitting this to be mentioned by any of those victims.

    My email address is below. Maybe you can justify to one of those victims why they can treated in that way AND silenced if they try to speak out.

    Quite a bit of this article talked about “rape culture”. At this time Huffington Post should be considering it’s own contribution to maintaining and defending rape culture.

  16. Schwyzer needs to believe that all women are victims of bad horrible men all the time, so there is no arguing with him. I tried but it’s no use because a woman who is not a perennial victim disturbs his worldview and makes him very angry.

  17. Schwyzer and his dittoheads, while not going away, are in for a rude awakening. Male survivors of sexual violence are not going to go away. We are done sitting in the corner, in the dark, with our heads hung low. Only recently have we begun to find our voice.

    He just might as well get some better earplugs. Some of us can be pretty damned loud.

  18. ” I tried but it’s no use because a woman who is not a perennial victim disturbs his worldview and makes him very angry.”

    IME the worst and most sinister abuse I’ve ever received was from men who wanted me to play damsel to their white knight and when I didn’t…

    Holy shit were they pissed off.

  19. I’ve just realised that Hugo has never actually lowered himself to speaking to me. He’s had plenty of opportunities over the years. I’ve been waiting to see if Hugo had it in him to withdraw honourably when the opportunity presented. I tried to show him a way. Lisa Hickey clearly indicated that it is Hugo guiding her and GMP on these matters. I want to know if Hugo has the honour and integrity to step back of his own volition. So far it seems he doesn’t.

  20. Gwallan, Schwyzer is the editor for the Sex and Gender section of GMP. I suspect that is partly why it took ten days for my submission to go through. I do not think Schwyzer wanted it published and that it may have been done against his dissent. That would explain his reaction to it. If Hickey is looking to Schwyzer on these matters, I agree that this is a problem because Schwyzer has a clear bias against male victims and any discussion of them.

    However, I hope that more people will submit work to GMP about sexual violence against males. I do think it is an unwelcome discussion there, but it is a discussion that people need to have.

  21. Most submissions to GMP are on line in a matter of hours. 10 days does seem overly long.

    I am surprised that the work of people such as Barbara Kay does not feature at GMP.

    I wonder if she has been asked to contribute? She is an excellent writer and very good on addressing “Learnt Sexism” by both genders.

    Maybe it’s because she’s Canadian?

    She has very clear credentials, experience and a none shrill voice on issues around abuse and violence against men. She even looks at the evidence.

    Her October 2011 piece “Women are not always the ‘gentler sex’”, is a case in hand.

    GMP talk about allies, so I wonder they see her that way?

    It may be an idea to do a “He Says – She Says” and have Her and Hugo both write on the same issue to allow a compare and contrast? It could even increase comment and page hits.

    I like her closing comment to the October piece –

    “Victorian chivalry and 21st century feminism would seem to make strange bedfellows, but in their equally unrealistic characterization of women as the always “gentler sex,” they condemn both male and female victims of female-perpetrated abuse to silence and second-class social status.

    To err is human. Are women fully human? Then stop treating them like saints or permanent moral infants.”

  22. Mediahound: “Most submissions to GMP are on line in a matter of hours. 10 days does seem overly long. ”

    I submitted something Sunday night. It’s been, as of now, three days since and I haven’t heard a thing from them.

    But now that I’ve learned of Hugo being one of their editors, I hold no hope of it ever getting published.

  23. Toysoldier: “Eagle, what did you submit?”

    “Hurt By Girls and Women: One Man’s Account”

    Basically talking about my experiences bullied by the opposite sex, the pain, invalidation. At one point, I take all the feminists who minimilised my experiences to task and society for supporting the “Grrl Power” misandry in stories with female protoganonists like Pixar’s aniamted film Brave coming out next year.

    Hugo’s not going to like that one, no sir. Even though I go out of my way to say, later on, that there were feminists I met currently who supported me.

    Still, I can’t imagine Hugo approving it. If the article is trashed, I won’t be surprised. It’ll further cement the fact that The Good Men Project is nothing but gynocentric trash.

  24. Glad I found this discussion… One of my comments on Tom’s media video (“On rape, the catholic church…” ) has been censored, and I too am considering if GMP is “reachable” with something I might submit. They have some really good stuff (like your post TS!) and some total misandry and it makes for a confusing mix.

    But propping up falsehoods and an ideologue like Hugo and the censoring of my voice has lead me to decide tentatively to stop participating or reading at all (completely ignore the site).

    I thought to write about the sexism in this piece: http://www.salon.com/2011/11/30/married_to_a_pedophile/singleton/ somewhere for example.

    It’s hard to find a place to write about male victimization. What’s the point when no body wants to hear it? Or people attack it defending some ideology?

    Any advice for me?

  25. Oh, so somewhere I saw “the editors” at GMP were looking for some kind of expert to advise them about the state of scientific reality around male victimization or something like that I thought… Really? Is anyone interested in reality?

    I thought of jimhopper.com right away but asking that question belies a certain resistant to finding things they don’t want to find.

  26. Still, I can’t imagine Hugo approving it.

    I do not think Schwyzer has the final say, but I do think he is part of the process. I have no problem with GMP having a vetting process, but I hope that process is not biased.

  27. Allan, part of the reason I started this blog was so that I would have a place to write about male victimization without any risk of censorship. Blogs are free, so I would encourage you to start one and write about what you will. This blog is not all that popular or active, but apparently it is more well known than I thought and it is known for discussing male victimization (much to some people’s chagrin).

  28. Toysoldier: “I do not think Schwyzer has the final say, but I do think he is part of the process. I have no problem with GMP having a vetting process, but I hope that process is not biased.”

    It better not be. Voices like mine deserve a venue.

    If it is, then I’m going to let Lisa know how much the site is driving away survivors like me thanks to a major bias before bidding it good-bye and good riddance.

  29. TS, I’m not inspired too much by the notion of a personal blog. Perhaps as a sort of sandbox for writing ideas, but frankly, these ideas are very important and I want to reach a large audience. Also, words are the only way to communicate and the emotional truths of victimization are better communicated in images and art. Some kind of public performance art is more the mode of expression I need I think. For example, the image of 200 men crying holding pictures of themselves as boys in the Oprah show… that said more than any words ever will.

  30. Allan, you could always write essays and submit them to various papers and publications. It takes time to build up enough notoriety to get people to listen to you.

  31. This may be late – but whilst checking some figures relating to abuse and disability I noted the following:

    “6% of women and 8% of men who use the services of paid personal care attendants report being forced into unwanted sexual activity by these employees. (Note – gender of abuser is not analyzed only gender of the abused.)

    Men report more pressure to submit to sexual activity because of attitudes of their abusers
    that they should want/be grateful for any sexual activity. (Note – the sexuality of abused and abuser is not analyzed.)

    Both from – – Gesson, Lisa. 2004. Domestic Violence Against People with Disabilities: The Untold Story. Action Online: Magazine of the United Spinal Association.

    Also reported via – http://www.equalrightscenter.org/site/PageServer?pagename=issues_domesticviolence

    The other evidence presented by equalrightscenter.org is gender skewed and even sexuality skewed – but there is a most interesting comment that opens a door “Due to these feelings, individuals with disabilities may not identify as a survivor or think the abuse abnormal.”

    The nature of feelings are directly linked to Stereotypical views identified in the study – yet the study itself does little to address stereotypes used in the creation of the study itself.

    Bit of an own goal – and bias!

    Lisa Geeson is on record herself as stating:

    “There is very little research on the sexual abuse of men with disabilities, but what this suggests is that it may occur at much higher rates, due to underreporting, a lack of recognition, as well as the reasons women cite for not reporting sexual abuse: shame and fear. Sometimes, people with disabilities who are the victims of abuse, whether it be by family, friends, or paid personal care attendants, fail to report longstanding violations.”

    Also – “Frighteningly, some people with disabilities are victims of more than one abuser.”

    and – “Domestic violence makes us feel afraid of the people that are supposed to love and care for us, making us fear all people.”

    I’m wondering also why here on TS certain publications have not been mentioned?

    such as;

    Why the Overwhelming Evidence on Partner Physical Violence by Women Has Not Been
    Perceived and Is Often Denied
    MURRAY A. STRAUS – University of New Hampshire, Durham, 2009


    2) Future Research on Gender Symmetry in Physical Assaults on Partners
    Murray A. Straus – University of New Hampshire, Durham – 2006

  32. Pingback: One of these things is not like the other | Toy Soldiers

  33. I note that Mr Hugo Schwyzer has apparently resigned from GMP – siting a number of reasons and indicating that some operate double standards. He does not welcome.

    On 24 November – I wrote and specifically requested that Mr Schwyzer address his inaccurate and false claims against Jacob. Jacob had raised these on 21 November, but Schwyzer ignored the issue.

    My request for Schwyzer to address his errors can be read here – http://goodmenproject.com/featured-content/women-rape-boys-too/comment-page-2/#comment-69443

    I also as a matter of courtesy contacted Mr Schwyzer directly and alerted him to matters, in case they escaped his attention.

    Yet 28 says later Mr Schwyzer is still to answer whilst seeking to make political capital out of Twittergate.

    Schwyzer Holds people such as Tom Matlack to a higher standard than he does himself – a double standard.

    I am not surprised that Mr Schwyzer jumped ship. He had too much unfinished business he wished to run away from!

    As some one claims they are a professor, speaker, academic and the shatterer of gender myths, Mr Schwyzer is a disgrace to academia and to other men.

    I believe that GMP will be far better without him – and his double standards.

    I have also advised others of my actions in contacting Mr Schwyzer on 24 November. Should they wish to verify that here that is their choice.

    I also have been predicting Mr Schwyzers exit for some weeks. Others are aware of that too – should they wish to support that I would also welcome it.

  34. What I find particularly entertaining about Schwyzer’s explanation for his resignation is his that GMP “took an increasingly anti-feminist stance.” I would love to know what GMP site Schwyzer read, because short of a handful of articles critiquing feminist concepts, there was nothing recently posted that could remotely count as “anti-feminist.” In particular, all the recent articles that were in response to feminist articles. It sounds like Schwyzer simply did not want anyone questioning feminism or feminist theories.

    Worse, he apparently mispresented what occurred, as Lisa Hickey explained in a comment on Schwyzer’s post. He has my pity. It is sad to see someone so locked into their political views that they cannot see past them, even to the point of writing an article that ironically chastises men for doing what Schwyzer does to men in that very article.

  35. I also find it egregious since he was openly disagreeing with Tom on the subject of child sexual abuse on 17 November.

    “To Prevent Future Penn States, We Need to Celebrate the Good in Male Sexuality”

    “It’s always risky for a writer to disagree with a magazine’s founder, but I want to take slight issue with Tom Matlack’s Look in the Mirror: the Hypocrisy of PSU Rage.”

    Mr Schwyzr seemed more interested in unquoted evidence for pornography usage than children being sexual abused.

    “It’s easy to confuse a greater awareness of sexual abuse with an assumption that the cases of such abuse are on the rise. The widespread belief that internet pornography has led to an increase in sexual violence simply isn’t supported by the evidence. While I’m not prepared to go to the opposite extreme, and declare that cybererotica is making the world safer, there’s a growing body of research that suggests just that”

    He used the word evidence!

    Saying men should celebrate sexuality when the focus is on children being sexually abused is not really the way to be in line with the spirit of the times – never mind The GMP.

    Is it that Hugo is a major Cyber Sexual and is using GMP to cover up his peccadillos, and worried that Child Sexual abuse is just getting in the way of his erotic use of the net?That is a personal attack, and very harsh one. Do not make not that accusation again unless you can prove it – TS

    It’s an odd stance for a man who now claims ” feminism and gender justice are central to my writing and my work”. I wonder how many feminists agree with his stance as of 17 November?

    He seems to like Justice for one group but not another – such as kids!

    He attempts to claim that discord is all about Twitter gate – but his own words show it goes far further back than that. He shows just how opportunistic and two faced he is! I did note he was very unspecific about the nature of any discord – nice trick to keep his adoring fans beguiled and gulled. Poor Hugo – he will be Orgasmic just reading the comments of support for his supposed brave stance for Gender Justice.

    Gender Justice? “Author, Professor, Speaker, Shattering Gender Myths” – he says there is great evidence in support or porn and then 5 days later he is dismissing clear evidence of child sexual abuse gathered over years and published by the most respected authority on the subject in the UK – Childline the emergency phone service of the NSPCC – over 100 years old with a Royal Charter from Queen Victoria?

    No wonder Him and Tom had differences – It seems they differed over the basic concept of what was a good man. Porn? Child Abuse?

    God That is a hard choice!

    I think that GMP and Tom may just win out!

  36. Pingback: This is what it looks like | Toy Soldiers

  37. Pingback: You’re not helping v10 | Toy Soldiers

  38. Pingback: This Is What It Looks Like v6 | Toy Soldiers

  39. Pingback: Hugo Schwyzer: “I’m sorry for denying male rape victims. I was one.” | Toy Soldiers

  40. Pingback: Get Ready, Get Involved or Get Out of the Way – Official Website of James Landrith

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s