Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by blks | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

blks

[flagged]

View on HN

Men seem to attack women more often that the other way around but both directions are signifcant

https://www.cdc.gov/intimate-partner-violence/about/index.ht...

Notably:

—- About 41% of women and 26% of men experienced contact sexual violence, physical violence, or stalking by an intimate partner during their lifetime and reported a related impact.

—- Over 61 million women and 53 million men have experienced psychological aggression by an intimate partner in their lifetime.

From memory I think those numbers for men include those in same sex relationships. Also worth noting that men are much more likely to be physically or psychologically attacked by other men than they are by women.

I’m not minimising the idea that women can Be violent, but we need to be careful to have in proportion. If you look at the most serious categories of harm, or only murder, the differences really are very stark.

Male same-sex relationships have the lowest numbers of abuse between all four categories, btw.

> sexual violence, physical violence, or stalking

> psychological aggression

Not at all downplaying the seriousness of emotional and psychological abuse, but these are very different things. Which is the main reason that the concept of this app doesn't bother me much. The immediate physical safety risks of dating as a woman are significantly greater than for men.

Sure, but it's about a factor of two -- the difference between the sun at noon and 5pm, not the difference between night and day.

Broken bones heal, but psychological wounds can last a lifetime -- and cut that lifetime short either through self-harm or the impact on chronic diseases. Sexual assault is so problematic because it has a very long term psychological impact on people.

It also seems obvious that a physical wound very likely occurs in a context that may also create a psychological one.

Would you pursue that line of justification if the issue were ethnicity, nationality, sexual orientation, and/or gender expression? I'm not saying you should or shouldn't, and there are sound arguments for and against equating those things, but it seems like it merits consideration before one comments, not after.

So you'll agree with the following?:

Because we live in black crime culture and blacks do violently attack whites on much greater scale than the other way around. You don’t have to be even necessarily evil for that, honestly just some normalised behaviour in some black people can be enough to become a criminal for white people.

But you are just explaining why you are bigoted, bigotry which, in turn, you imply explains why you don't think it's wrong to be sexist. Sexist enough to disregard the importance of publicly sharing people's information.

Do you not see how this is deeply wrong?

I’m a man myself, I have dated both men and women, and I did once experienced sexual assault by a men.

From a personal experience, I know for example a person in my friends group who turned to be a person that forces himself on drunken women at parties after they say no. And I don’t see anything wrong with letting all my friends know about this.

I don’t really understand why you here feel so afraid of people gossiping online. I’m a man that sleeps with women and I am not afraid about them talking about me. Even if they loose some platform, you know, they will still talk to each other.

> Because we live in patriarchal culture

It's crazy how often this is used to justify awful behavior.

At what point do you have to define and actually prove the existence of "patriarchal culture"?

“awful behaviour” such as?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com