Most of them honestly do not think men need DV shelters, based on a type of warped logic that most of them don't want to spend much time discussing...because it doesn't hold up to scrutiny.
Even though they know that there are men out there who are being battered and even killed by women, they believe that...
Best answer: Most of them honestly do not think men need DV shelters, based on a type of warped logic that most of them don't want to spend much time discussing...because it doesn't hold up to scrutiny.
Even though they know that there are men out there who are being battered and even killed by women, they believe that all it would take for them to be safe is to put some minimal effort into defending themselves from the assault, since men are significantly stronger and bigger than women. They also think that most men have enough money to just leave the house and pay for their own hotels, so they have no real need for emergency shelter.
However, if you go deeper and ask them if they think it's okay for that battered man to hit her back in defense, their answers are almost always something like: "No one should be hitting anyone else. Just block or restrain her until the police can get there." However, if you ask them if it's okay for the woman to use force to defend herself in a similar situation, they say that she absolutely should use as much force as necessary to defend herself, even if that means shooting and killing him.
If you ask them if it's okay for that battered guy to leave in the middle of the night and take the kids with him without telling the mother where they're going, they immediately say that it's kidnapping and that it's doubtful that a woman would be a danger to her kids, even if she is hitting her husband. He probably did something to cause her to hit him anyway. However, it's perfectly fine for a battered woman in a similar situation to take the kids with her in the middle of the night without telling the dad. If he's hitting her, he's probably abusing the kids too.
If you ask them if it would be okay for a battered guy to take any significant amount of money out of their joint bank account to fund that hotel, they say that it would be wrong for him to do that, because she needs that money to care for the kids, and most women make less money than men. However, it's perfectly fine for a woman in that position to completely empty the bank account when she leaves. After all, he's been beating her, why should she care if he has money to buy food or not.
It goes on and on.
Just imagine if MRAs used this same type of logic to insist that female DV shelters should be closed down or that women should get no help at all when they're being abused by their partners. It wouldn't just be labeled sexist, it would be considered misogynistic and evil.
The bottom line is that most feminists do not have a consistent stance on this subject, and they don't actually care enough about battered men to take a closer look at how their "solution" to female on male DV is not only unhelpful, it's also unreasonable, dangerous and extremely unfair.
Most feminists, and even most women do not see how strongly biased they are against men, especially men who get beaten up by their female partners, and unfortunately, most men tend to be even less supportive or sympathetic towards battered men than even feminists and women are. With that in mind, it's not all that surprising that there are few resources for battered men, and I honestly doubt there ever will be.
2 days ago