Hugo Schwyzer: “I’m sorry for denying male rape victims. I was one.”

James Landrith emailed me a cached version of Hugo Schwyzer’s recent post. Schwyzer removed the original shortly after posting it. I still marvel at why anyone would allow the man access to the internet in his present state. I suppose no one can keep from going online unless he is locked up. However, one would think that those around him would monitor him as much as possible given how badly he embarrassed himself the last time he went online.

As for the article, Schwyzer states in it that he was raped by an older sailor when he was 19-years-old. Here is the article in full:

(Trigger warning for sexual violence)

The breakthrough came in therapy this week. I had been raped. It happened in 1986, a generation ago, when I was an attention-starved 19 year-old. My rapist was an older Navy sailor, a massive man. I changed several details of our story for a piece that ran in Best Sex Writing 2012. I made it sound consensual, I made it sound hot, It was neither of those things.

The vulnerability of men and boys to rape is real and undersold. Despite what a handful of men’s rights advocates insist, the greatest threat isn’t predatory older women. It’s older men. We know the truth about the Catholic Church and the Boy Scouts, but what about other institutions in the US and Israel? Are we doing enough to protect our sons as well as our daughters?

Technically, I was a legal adult when I was raped by a man twice my age. Had I been a 19 year-old girl assaulted by a sailor in his 40s, there might have been more sympathy. I won’t know, as I only broke down in group therapy this week and told the story about Mike from the USS Mt Vernon and what he did to my body and soul. Given my current state of public disrepute, this might seem a bid for attention. It’s not.

I’ve spent my whole life worrying about men as predators and dismissing the idea of men as victims. I haven’t wanted to see my own victimization as plausible, and I haven’t wanted to remember the details of what got done to me on May 24, 1986, in a seedy little Monterey motel.

Mike scared me, he beat me, he throat-fucked me and told me he’d kill me if I beat him. He hurt me badly. Some of my rage and fear at men has been with me ever since, and it has shown in my politics and my refusal to acknowledge that boys and men can be comparably harmed.

Too little, too late.

I am not sure what to make of this. Like James, I have no reason to dismiss Schwyzer’s claims. This would in part explain Schwyzer’s attitudes towards men and males survivors. Abused males might remind him of his own victimization, and lashing out at those men would be a way of denying what happened to him.

We see this kind of projection with many anti-gay proponents. They bash gay people, particularly gay men, and then we later find out that this person, who is inevitably male, is also gay.

However, Schwyzer is an admitted manipulator. It is therefore possible that he is using this experience to gain attention, which he denies. It is also unfortunately possible, given his admission to dishonesty, that he may be lying to gain sympathy. I think it is more probable that this is a ploy to get men’s rights activists to attack him in order to prove they do not care about male survivors.

On the off chance that any of them fall for that ploy, let me explain why their response would be fair: Schwyzer used every opportunity he had to attack, mock, marginalize, deny, and excuse sexual violence against men and boys. Every time someone mentioned male victimization he railed against them. He treated sexual violence against males as a non-issue made up by men’s rights activists to silence women. He did this in every space he wrote for, from Jezebel to The Good Men Project.

When I wrote about women’s violence against boys, Schwyzer tweeted, “Most dishonest thing I’ve see at @goodmenproject: ‘Women Rape Boys Too’ … Conflates rape stats with other abuse stats.”

This is the same man who accused an 11-year-old boy of raping his adult nanny because the boy came from a wealthy family and therefore had power over the nanny. Or as Schwyzer put it:

There is one thing that we do need to point out, and that is that even pre-pubescent boys can be sexual aggressors. Their targets are usually those who are, for reasons of age or status, vulnerable. An eleven year-old boy who is sexually assaulted by his thirty year-old female teacher is in a very different position than an eleven year-old boy who initiates sex with his thirty year-old nanny. Age compromises the capacity to consent, as we all know. But we must also acknowledge that class, status, and fear compromise consent as well.

Schwyzer does not get to play this game. Whether he is telling the truth about his experiences or not, he has done far more harm to male survivors than he realizes. There are men and boys who read his site, read his articles, and listened to him speak who heard only that what happened to them rarely happens, is not that bad when it happens, and does not really count.

You cannot treat people like that. You cannot play mind games with abuse survivors. You cannot do that to suffering people, and then share your story as if that will make it all better.

It does not.

If men’s rights activists, or anyone else, decide to question Schwyzer’s veracity, he has only himself to blame. He put himself in this position by lying so often and by attacking the very group he now says he is a part of.

As for his claim that “despite what a handful of men’s rights advocates insist, the greatest threat isn’t predatory older women. It’s older men,” that is statistically untrue. As the CDC report shows, women commit the majority of sexual violence against males, most of which was committed against boys. This is not to say that there are not predatory men who prey on young men and boys. Of course there are.

Nevertheless, the greatest threat is not from the expected but the unexpected. No one looks at women as potential predators. Even when women commit sexual assault, many people, like Schwyzer, still view the women as the victims. Should male survivors come forward, they face ridicule, shame, a questioning of their sexual orientation, or back-slapping. Few people, including the authorities, view them as victims of sexual violence.

That puts female offenders in an excellent position because no one is looking for them, and should they be caught, chances are they will walk rather than face prison time.

James responded to Schwyzer’s article as well. He ends his piece with:

“Too little, too late.”

He got that right. To ever earn my trust or respect, it truly is “too little, too late.” However, it is never to late to begin to heal from any trauma. Time for Schwyzer to shut his mouth, take the lumps he has earned – and he has earned them all in truckloads – and focus on his mental health. Multiple groups of human beings have their own right to be angry with the likes of Hugo Schwyzer and some of his inner circle of supporters.

Time for Schwyzer to listen and learn. He has done far too much talking already.

I will add that whoever is around Schwyzer needs to keep this man away the internet. If you have to cancel the service, do it. This man is unstable, and he has absolutely no business being online.

Advertisements

22 thoughts on “Hugo Schwyzer: “I’m sorry for denying male rape victims. I was one.”

  1. While I sympathize with his pain, he steadfastly refuses to let go of his ideological binders. Hence why he wrote here:

    “The vulnerability of men and boys to rape is real and undersold. Despite what a handful of men’s rights advocates insist, the greatest threat isn’t predatory older women. It’s older men.”

    Here he is, throwing male victims of female predators (even older female predators) under the bus.

    Despite what he believes, older female predators are just as threatening as older male predators.

    Sorry, but his begging for forgiveness still rings hollow.

  2. I think it is more probable that this is a ploy to get men’s rights activists to attack him in order to prove they do not care about male survivors.
    That’s why I’m so glad that, at least on a large scale, MRAs are not giving Schwyzer the time of day. Considering how feminists had almost no problem with Schwyzer until they found out what he has done to women the last thing MRAs need to do is go down that same path.

    Nevertheless, the greatest threat is not from the expected but the unexpected. No one looks at women as potential predators. Even when women commit sexual assault, many people, like Schwyzer, still view the women as the victims. Should male survivors come forward, they face ridicule, shame, a questioning of their sexual orientation, or back-slapping. Few people, including the authorities, view them as victims of sexual violence.
    The sickening irony is that the treatment of male victims of sexual violence face some of the very same hurdles as female victims. So how can it be that a man (or a movement) in one breath boldly and bravely support one set of victims why backhandedly attacking another when the only difference is gender?

    Schwyzer made his name with feminists and women by burning bridges with a lot of men and lot of MRAs.

  3. “They bash gay people, particularly gay men, and then we later find out that this person, who is inevitably male, is also gay.”

    This has literally only ever happened once and this case has been used for years now, as a weapon to cow people who rightfully think that homosexuals are pretty much mentally ill into silence.

    If you truly believe this, you are a fool who understands nothing.

    People think incest is bad. I guess that they merely proves that they want to fuck their sister.

  4. The vulnerability of men and boys to rape is real and undersold. Despite what a handful of men’s rights advocates insist, the greatest threat isn’t predatory older women.

    Nice straw man, Hugo.

    I’ve spent my whole life worrying about men as predators and dismissing the idea of men as victims.

    And now you’re only doing only one of those things, while still ignoring the idea of women as predators. Progress, I guess?

    Also, I think the Sarkozy thing was turned into an episode of SVU starring the guy from “The Nanny”, except there, the boy was clearly a rapist.

  5. Come on guys, I don’t deny that many older women take advantage of younger men and use their sexual power over them to manipulate them. And that society has too little sympathy for these guys. But get real, being raped by a man is much worse. I think for the most part this is a healthy progression for this guy. Whether men’s rights activists ‘accept’ him or not is I think irrelevant, the larger point is that a former dedicated misandrist is admitting that trauma and mental instability was the source of the way he was and that he needs to change. That’s the kind of thing we’ve been saying for years and now here’s a former male feminist admitting it.

  6. Mike:
    But get real, being raped by a man is much worse.
    As far as I can tell no one here is trying to say that being raped by a woman is worse than being raped by a man. As a matter of fact why is this even a question? What do we do if we could actually solve which is worse? Does that mean that dismiss those raped by women because “they are harmed as badly as those raped by men”?

    I’m not sure what part of getting “real” requires declaring that rape by either woman or man is worse than the other.

    Why can’t we just work on getting help to the survivors that need it instead of trying to perform some sick form of sexist triage?

    That’s the kind of thing we’ve been saying for years and now here’s a former male feminist admitting it.
    Has he denounced feminism? (And that’s serious question, he may have I don’t know.)

  7. Schwyzer reminds me of that quote about God- “If He didn’t exist, we’d have to invent him”.

    He is the ultimate manifestation of a sick culture and a sick individual appearing to be the “new normal”.

    My wife has an extraordinary talent for sizing up the worth of people we meet, instantly. “He’s dangerous”, “She’s unbalanced”, etc. I on the other hand give everyone the benefit of the doubt, every time and I am wrong about half the time and she misses…I can’t think of her ever being wrong. I call it intuitive intelligence- whatever, but when I have a visceral feeling about people, gays most often, overly pierced or tattooed folk, etc I try and dismiss it as being a quirk when it almost always later reveals itself to be a manifestation of deeper damage.

    Feminism, progressivism, ideologies based on wishful thinking like egalitarianism are no different than massive earplugs or neck tats- they are screams for attention made flesh. Healthy organisms do not manifest unnatural proclivities or intentional defacements. When I see an animal behaving unusally, eating something unhealthy, harming itself, repeatedly engaging in unnatural behaviors it is ALWAYS an indication of poor health, bad genetics or abusive husbandry. Giving these animals what they need fixes the problems in virtually every case and those that do not respond are culled. It is only with human beings that we all seem to agree collectively to either ignore these signs of ill health/poor genetics and even- especially in the last twenty years or so- extol these manifestations of sickness.

    Hugo appears to my eyes to be a very sick man in need of help that I sincerely doubt he will ever get because he is too deeply invested in his rationalizations and too supported by social normalization of his illness. Hugo is the individual version of the Western World collective malady.

    Just an observation.

  8. Mike: “Come on guys, I don’t deny that many older women take advantage of younger men and use their sexual power over them to manipulate them. And that society has too little sympathy for these guys. But get real, being raped by a man is much worse.”

    Whether the perpetrator is a man or a woman, you forget that the stigma attached to admitting victimization is the same. Unless you want to play semantics, which is a big mistake if you truly believe that everyone deserves support for their trauma, nothing is worse than the other nor better.

    Mike: “I think for the most part this is a healthy progression for this guy. Whether men’s rights activists ‘accept’ him or not is I think irrelevant, the larger point is that a former dedicated misandrist is admitting that trauma and mental instability was the source of the way he was and that he needs to change. That’s the kind of thing we’ve been saying for years and now here’s a former male feminist admitting it.”

    He may have admitted his mistakes but his ideological mantras have not vanished, hence why he threw male victims of older females under the bus at the same time he concedes that male victims are stigmitzed.

    Pretty contradictory to say, in one breath, that male victims and survivors face stimigtization while stigmitizing male victims and survivors of female perpetrators at the same time.

    Then again, you did the same thing Mike.

  9. @ Danny: Seconded. No one tried to play Oppression Olympics but you, Mike. Unless you mean “much worse by prevalence”, which is false, as the post pointed out. Also, no one said anything about “older women”. In fact, I specifically pointed out that MRAs do not specify older women, and Hugo claiming that they do is a straw man.

    It’s also odd that you don’t describe what the older women do as rape, when you so willingly describe the actions of older men that way.

    @Eagle35:

    Whether the perpetrator is a man or a woman, you forget that the stigma attached to admitting victimization is the same. Unless you want to play semantics, which is a big mistake if you truly believe that everyone deserves support for their trauma, nothing is worse than the other nor better.

    I’m not sure I agree. Generally, men are more discouraged from admitting victimization in general (and rape in particular) than women on a social and institutional level.

    He may have admitted his mistakes but his ideological mantras have not vanished, hence why he threw male victims of older females under the bus at the same time he concedes that male victims are stigmitzed.

    This seems to be common among feminists who try to talk about male rape. It goes hand in hand with the Toxic Masculinity shpiel, where all of men’s problems are apparently caused by other men. Actually admitting that women do it too* too would pose a serious ideological challenge.

    *Some admit that women can rape men, then hurriedly say that men do rape men and women.

  10. Come on guys, I don’t deny that many older women take advantage of younger men and use their sexual power over them to manipulate them. And that society has too little sympathy for these guys. But get real, being raped by a man is much worse.

    I have experienced both and spoken with men and women who have experienced both. Neither I or any of those people agree. For the sake of clarity, I will be blunt in my descriptions.

    Physically speaking, women are capable of inflicting more damage as they will make up for their lack of a penis by using an object. A person with a penis has a limit to how violent he can be during the assault because he can feel it too. A dildo has no sensation, so a woman using one in her hands or with a strap-on can assault someone until she gets tired of doing it. The lack of sensation also makes it hard to tell what the victim is experiencing, making it more likely that the person using the object will shove further than a man using his penis could.

    Should the woman make the man or boy penetrate her, she is quite capable of causing him pain if she is on top and engages in rough sex. The penis is not meant to move around that much when erect, so pulling it in random directions at vigorous speeds risks tearing the ligaments and muscles. It also hurts. If you do not believe me, the next time you get an erection, lie down on a bed on your stomach. Try to put your penis in the opposite direction of the natural arch of your erection and see how long you can tolerate that before getting up or losing the erection.

    Oral sex also presents risks. Rough oral sex can result in the person biting the penis or sucking so hard that it hurts. Being forced to perform oral sex can result in such pleasantries as having your tongue cramp or your jaw lock. There is also the possibility that she will not warn you when she is on her period.

    Emotionally speaking, few things are as humiliating as having your body respond in a way you do not want it to. To know that someone can stimulate you, essentially control your body, is incredibly disempowering. What is worse is that over time your body will learn to respond not only to the stimuli itself but also the thought of it. In short, sometimes just thinking about the abuse can cause arousal. It is quite disgusting, especially if you hate the acts your were forced to do.

    For an added bonus, one must also deal with people telling you that what happened to you was not that bad or that it would be worse if a man did. That wonderful advice reminds you are making something out of nothing.

    This is not a competition, and there is no way to gauge who has it worse. I know men who were fondled who suffer from PTSD while men who were viciously raped do not deal with any mental health problems at all. The nature of the abuse is not the best way to measure the potential harm caused, and to be honest it should not matter.

    I think for the most part this is a healthy progression for this guy. Whether men’s rights activists ‘accept’ him or not is I think irrelevant, the larger point is that a former dedicated misandrist is admitting that trauma and mental instability was the source of the way he was and that he needs to change. That’s the kind of thing we’ve been saying for years and now here’s a former male feminist admitting it.

    We do not know that Schwyzer changed his mind. The man is an admitted manipulator and liar, so could have shared the information to gain sympathy. Indeed, nothing he stated suggests that he changed his opinion. He only shared his experience.

  11. Jacques Cuze:
    A few days ago, I asked Hugo if he owed an apology to men, or to men’s rights or father’s rights activists. His response “Hell no”

    http://slymepit.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?p=134729#p134729
    This is not surprising. Just like any other walk of life feminists are notorious for doubling down on past offenses and offensive stances even as they claim to be open to change or are trying to change.

    This is the part where men and MRAs should be glad that they don’t actually need any sort of acknowledgement of wrongdoing from Hugo in order to continue on. Seriously Hugo will take his hatred of men and MRAs to his grave. And probably so because he thinks that one bit of hate will keep him in some sort of good graces with some feminists somewhere.

    Mark my works if that man ever comes back to the gender discourse the one thing that will NEVER change will his his hatred/disregard for men and MRAs.

  12. Actually I don’t think Hugo’s misandry is only about pleasing feminists. I predicted long before his shenanigans came out, that he was projecting. He himself thinks of women as sex objects and toys. Having daughter(s) he feels deeply resentful of that side of him. Like most people of that kind, when he sees a man, he can’t imagine that man feeling any different (because he can’t know any other way to be a man). So he assumes that man is like him.

    In fact I think a good percentage of male feminists are just projecting their views of women onto other men. That’s why there’s such a mess in the gender discourse with them. Those men who genuinely treat women as their peers, are rightfully upset by accusations from male feminists. But the male feminists will then take that upset as guilt or as more misogyny and see themselves proven right. Remember, they can’t imagine that their negative view of men might be wrong. It’s like asking them to imagine people not breathing air and doing fine.

    In fact, I think most female feminists are also projecting but in their case it’s more down to internalized feelings of inferiority rather than guilt. They interpret misogyny into so much precisely because that is how THEY feel deep inside. They “know” deep down that they’re nothing like equal to men – that’s why they subscribe to an ideology that makes them feel better. If they really believed they were equal to men, they’d just get on with their lives exactly like empowered women typically do.

  13. It’s a bizarre point of pride for men’s rights activists: we hated Hugo before hating Hugo was cool.

  14. This is not surprising. Just like any other walk of life feminists are notorious for doubling down on past offenses and offensive stances even as they claim to be open to change or are trying to change.

    If I read the tweets correctly, they were made before Schwyzer wrote his post. So perhaps the post was a response to that.

    Seriously Hugo will take his hatred of men and MRAs to his grave. And probably so because he thinks that one bit of hate will keep him in some sort of good graces with some feminists somewhere.

    If so, that is rather sad. To invest that kind of hatred only does further harm, especially to any children around such a person.

  15. AC:
    Actually I don’t think Hugo’s misandry is only about pleasing feminists.
    Of course not. He’s also about trying to please women in general as well.

    He himself thinks of women as sex objects and toys. Having daughter(s) he feels deeply resentful of that side of him. Like most people of that kind, when he sees a man, he can’t imagine that man feeling any different (because he can’t know any other way to be a man). So he assumes that man is like him.
    With the way he railed against men this is a reasonable thought. Funny thing is feminists are good for saying that abusive men/rapists think that all men think the way they do…but for some reason I guess they thought he was different?

    In fact I think a good percentage of male feminists are just projecting their views of women onto other men. That’s why there’s such a mess in the gender discourse with them. Those men who genuinely treat women as their peers, are rightfully upset by accusations from male feminists. But the male feminists will then take that upset as guilt or as more misogyny and see themselves proven right. Remember, they can’t imagine that their negative view of men might be wrong. It’s like asking them to imagine people not breathing air and doing fine.
    Also reasonable. And with the way female feminists are so anxious to support such men I wonder if they do so because it allows them to project their views of men but maintaining that since those men are feminists they are okay.

    They interpret misogyny into so much precisely because that is how THEY feel deep inside. They “know” deep down that they’re nothing like equal to men – that’s why they subscribe to an ideology that makes them feel better. If they really believed they were equal to men, they’d just get on with their lives exactly like empowered women typically do.
    I don’t know if its some sort of inferiority. I think its because they hold negative feelings towards men and they subscribe to an ideology that allows them to freely express that negativity under the disguise of equality.

  16. Having long ago lost any and all interest in the antics of Mr Cluster B Schwyzer, I was a little amused to have this raised for my attention. The time-line is just Too Convenient. The content appears linked to Schwyzers masochistic tendencies (well he did have his genitals mutilated for attention – and media reports of his self harming with cigarettes are public record) coupled with attention seeking.

    Talking about self-mutilation: “There’s something about a lit cigarette in my arm that for years and years, going back into my teens, has held a sort of romantic notion.” – April 2014 issue of Los Angeles magazine. So rape is achingly good and self harm romantic?

    Given how Schwyzer is so happy to reinvent his life for attention (Converting his rape of partner and attempted murder suicide into entertainment for his groupies comes to mind – all three re-writes ) I give little to no credence to any of his claims. He’s simply far to prone to Purposeful Confabulation and the creation of false realities to meet needs for attention. That is not to dismiss male victims, just Schwyzer’s claims as to his own experience and recollection. He is a poor Quality Liar due to his Bad memory and the Internet catching him out too often.

    He posted it – removed it – and hoped that there would be reaction, sympathy, an outpouring of support? Failed again – but that has been the story of his life.

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 )

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s