Canadian Hate

I click through a lot of blogs, never quite knowing where I'll end up. I like an active debate and to be encouraged to think outside of my comfort zone. But I may stop this practice for some time because it is causing me great distress. I come back here, to relieve the pressure.

I found the following on some Canadian Male Supremacy blog. I am saddened by the hatred.

Every year on December 6, 2008 the feminists draw our attention to the massacre of 14 women in Montreal at the hands of a deranged man and try and use the terrible tragedy to vilify all men as being somehow inherently violent. It serves their ends because gullible politicians, including Michael Ignatieff, our would be Prime Minister in waiting, fall for it. On the CBC thread it is easy to pick out the true feminists...

*Dismissal. The individual disregards, ignores, or brushes aside what happened or other people’s feelings as though they don’t matter.* 

*Labeling. The individual labels himself or someone else negatively, way, which shapes the way he sees himself or that other person, often for simplistic reasons.

Why is the writer so quick to cast this murderer as "other?" Labeling someone as crazy stops people from investigating the nature of the crime, and the person who committed it. And yet, if you say he is deranged, you must admit that the numerous murders of women (and men) are also done by "deranged" people. End the end, what does this solve?

How are feminists using this, or any other situation, to vilify ALL men? Feminist use this one tool to illustrate violence against women. They couldn't use this tool, if the violence hadn't occurred. And who says that men are all inherently violent? I suppose some men are, and some men aren't. However, we cannot deny the fact that men are the main perpetrators of violence (just as they are the main victims of violence). How can people keep denying this? Again, look at the news, the prison system, war....even if men weren't "inherently" violent, the fact is that men are socialized to either be violent, or accept violence as the norm--more than women are. And the dominant views in society, are a result of this patriarchal society. Patriarchy--not matriarchy.

What are men doing to combat the violence in our homes and communities? Where are the men speaking out against violence, period? At home, and abroad? 

And last, what is a "true feminist" versus maybe...a false feminist? I think a true feminist must be anyone that the author disagrees with.

The facts are that females initiate domestic violence against men in almost the same number as the reverse. There is perhaps a 1% difference in Canada and close to 50-50 in the USA. In addition lesbians have a much higher rate of DV against each other than do hetero. couples. Last time I checked Lesbians were female.

*Denial. The individual pretends it didn’t happen, and might even try to fool himself into thinking it didn’t happen. If he denies it ever happened, maybe it will go away.*

*Shifting the Focus. The individual tries to turn people’s minds and attention onto something else, and distract them from the real issue. *

I think that this "initiate" study is based on the Conflict Tactics Scale (CTS) that has been disputed and refuted endlessly. Nevertheless, even if women were initiating the violence (which is not good), men are causing the damage. The murders. The gun violence. What about the gun violence? People are dying.

And where are these "lesbian" studies? What some fail to realize is that if there really is indeed more violence among lesbian couples, it could be a result of the oppression of women. This kind of reminds me of the, "Oh, but Black people are just killing off themselves" notion. Blacks were enslaved. "Freedom" did not change the mentality from the time that they were physically and mentally tortured. I stand to think the same would be true of women.

In addition, I want to see if these "lesbian" studies analyzed each woman according to the type of "gender" role that was acted upon in the relationship. THIS IS IMPORTANT (especially if gender is a social construction)

The worst place in terms of safety of children is to give custody to a single parent female but courts do it in a 9-1 ratio shutting out loving fathers. Feminists do themselves a great disservice by spouting the hyperbole they do as, in my view, it just shows the very selfish agenda they have at the expense of 50% of the population they vilify. The idiot who killed the women was the son of an Algerian muslim who taught his son Islamic control of women before the family split. He changed his name to a his mother's maiden name, and he apparently had mental health issues.

The worst place? The worst place on earth? The author can't be serious, as studies have shown that children, and I think it was specifically female children, do worse in a single father household. A single parent female isn't even the issue. Poverty and lack of resources is.

Also, you cannot shut out a loving father that was not promoting equal parenting during the relationship.  I talked about this yesterday:  Women have traditionally "won" the kids because men didn't contest it.  If a woman was the primary caretaker of the child in the household, why should this continuity be disrupted?

*Blaming Others. The individual blames the problem and his own behavior, on someone or something else.*

How is feminism a selfish agenda?  It is feminism.  Isms develop out to fight oppression.  If we wanted to fight for men's rights, we wouldn't call it feminism.

Islamic control of women?  Otherizing again, this time using religion.  Funny, because they same thing could be said about Christianity subjugating women.  He (the killer) may have changed his name to his mother's maiden in order to reject his father...or denounce his religion. The fact that he came from a single mother is irrelevant.  If she lived in poverty or left because of abuse, that is relevant.  Then again, if he is just some deranged man, his background should be irrelevant also.

Shame on you feminists. If you believe in equality stop the vilifying of all men because one badly damaged male, brought up in a single parent female household did this deed.

*Minimization. The individual downplays the importance of what happened, or its meaning.*

Again, who is vilifying ALL men? This was just an example. Fourteen women's lives were lost in this tragic incident. 14. And this one male isn't the only one out there. We deal with these men on a regular basis.