Sexual violence, masculinity, and where these are rooted

[TruthSeeker1]

Recently there has been a lot of discussion among the Canadian media in particular about sexual assaults that have come to light at an all boys private school in Toronto. After this incident, some professional hockey players have also disclosed their own experiences with hazing. This got me thinking about sexual violence, and not just what we typically hear about, that of violence by men against women, but also violence by men against men. And that got me thinking about masculinity, and how it's defined, and how much do these definitions contribute to what's considered acceptable, and what isn't. The article that got me thinking was this one, for anyone interested I loved being class president at St. Mike’s. Here’s what it is getting wrong | The Star

The questions that I'm interested in are, how much do notions about what it is to be masculine, contribute to sexual violence, or validate it? How much are norms of masculinity changing? Are they really, even though there is a lot of talk about how it's more acceptable for men to be compassionate, and express emotion, instead of being tough and reserved? Is chauvinism, the attitude that men are superior to women, still relatively entrenched among men? Is sexual violence (hazing, outright sexual abuse) by men against men more acceptable to men then violence by men against women? If so, why is this?
Another aspect that interests me is the intersectionality with religion, and the ways in which religious beliefs have molded the notion of masculinity, and encouraged chauvinism. The Christian Bible is an excellent example of male chauvinism, with the violence perpetuated towards women in the OT, the fact that no women are given any voice in the Bible, and the teachings of Paul in particular in the NT, regarding the role of women. Christianity has definitely had a significant impact in western nations in regards to gender norms and roles and what it is to be masculine and feminine. Is it fair to conclude that private religious institutions are necessarily behind the times (since they cling to traditional norms based on religious texts, for example) and are still encouraging norms about masculinity which are ultimately harmful not only to women but to other men as well?
How much do those who leave religion, particularly men, reflect on the way that religion has impacted and likely continues to impact their norms of what it is to be a man, and masculinity? Some men clearly continue with very chauvinistic patterns, while others become more aware of how they have been shaped by their environment and beliefs, and actively try to change them.

I would love to hear about your thoughts or experiences on these issues/questions.

 

[74x12]

It's not masculinity's fault. It's not the Bible's fault. It's immorality's fault.

 

[Sunstone]

Sometime ago I ran across an interesting NPR article in which they reported on the Mosou people of China. If you are not familiar with them, the Mosou are considered to have one of the world's very few true matriarchal societies. Oddly enough, they are so unaccustomed to sexual violence against women by men that they don't even have a word in their language for "rape". If rapes occur, they are so rare, the Mosou have never bothered to create a word for them.

 

[TruthSeeker1]

It's not masculinity's fault. It's not the Bible's fault. It's immorality's fault.

This indicates you don't understand the constructs I'm discussing. Masculinity isn't something concrete that can be "at fault" - it's a concept, defined in different ways, according to the culture, religion, environment it exists in.
If there's something "at fault" with sexual violence, it's with those who perpetuate it individually. Constructs like masculinity contribute depending on how they are defined, they can't said to be "at fault" though.
I'm not looking to assign blame to concepts or constructs, I'm looking to actually discuss them and how they are defined, so if you're looking to make blanket statements such as the above, just move on.

 

[TruthSeeker1]

Sometime ago I ran across an interesting NPR article in which they reported on the Mosou people of China. If you are not familiar with them, the Mosou are considered to have one of the world's very few true matriarchal societies. Oddly enough, they are so unaccustomed to sexual violence against women by men that they don't even have a word in their language for "rape". If rapes occur, they are so rare, the Mosou have never bothered to create a word for them.

No, I'm not familiar with them at all, but thanks for this, I'm going to look into that culture, very interesting.

 

[MarkP]

I refer back to when cavemen hunted for food, so they had to be violent to survive. Now this behaviour is rare, and most men survive with non-violent jobs. However the violence can still be released, either as "pure" violence (eg fighting other men) or as sexual violence (we still talk of hunting a woman, and capturing her "heart").

Modern civilisation has reduced violence hugely, but as we see every day it is still with us, including rape and murder. An individual man of course has a choice, influenced by either religion or other factors. I am not a violent man, but I'm sure I have the capacity for it.

 

[TruthSeeker1]

Here's the other side of the coin, a matriarchal vs a patriarchal society. Interesting read.
The kingdom of women: the society where a man is never the boss

 

[InChrist]

I don't believe there is anything wrong with masculinity itself until it becomes warped into an attitude of where one has a profound mentality of entitlement to control and have power over those he chooses to mistreat. This attitude, I believe has it's origin and inspiration from satan who desires to exalt himself which is totally the opposite of Christ who although He was God humbled Himself in love to serve others.

 

[TruthSeeker1]

I refer back to when cavemen hunted for food, so they had to be violent to survive. Now this behaviour is rare, and most men survive with non-violent jobs. However the violence can still be released, either as "pure" violence (eg fighting other men) or as sexual violence (we still talk of hunting a woman, and capturing her "heart").

Modern civilisation has reduced violence hugely, but as we see every day it is still with us, including rape and murder. An individual man of course has a choice, influenced by either religion or other factors. I am not a violent man, but I'm sure I have the capacity for it.

I differentiate between violence for survival, ie sustenance, and violence against what would have likely been considered one's kinsmen or women. Doesn't that seem counter productive? Yes, violence was very likely a common occurrence between opposing tribes, for reproductive reasons, and was and continues to be an intimidation/control tactic in war (rape, in particular).

I tend to think a large part of this is determined by culture and environment, role modeling etc, more so than what we humans did when we lived in caves.

 

[MarkP]

I differentiate between violence for survival, ie sustenance, and violence against what would have likely been considered one's kinsmen or women. Doesn't that seem counter productive? Yes, violence was very likely a common occurrence between opposing tribes, for reproductive reasons, and was and continues to be an intimidation/control tactic in war (rape, in particular).

I tend to think a large part of this is determined by culture and environment, role modeling etc, more so than what we humans did when we lived in caves.

For reasons of space (and finger ache) I did not attempt to trace the development of male violence from the Stone Age to the present! I do not deny that another form of society (eg matriarchal) would reduce it, but I wrote from my experience of patriarchal life in UK.

 

[TruthSeeker1]

I don't believe there is anything wrong with masculinity itself until it becomes warped into an attitude of where one has a profound mentality of entitlement to control and have power over those he chooses to mistreat. This attitude, I believe has it's origin and inspiration from satan who desires to exalt himself which is totally the opposite of Christ who although He was God humbled Himself in love to serve others.

I have known good Christians, and terrible, abusive Christians.
I'm also an atheist.
I tend to think those who are religious, can abuse terribly (and misuse religion) in doing so, or act in a positive, healthy way. Do I think religion (satan or another fairy entity) inspires them? No. I think they act according to personal choice, and in both cases, good or bad, they use religion as the justification for their actions. "Satan did it, satan convinced me" has been used as an incredibly convenient justification to excuse oneself from one's personal responsibility and terrible behavior down through the ages.

 

[TruthSeeker1]

For reasons of space (and finger ache) I did not attempt to trace the development of male violence from the Stone Age to the present! I do not deny that another form of society (eg matriarchal) would reduce it, but I wrote from my experience of patriarchal life in UK.

Yes, understandably, we aren't going to go into the nitty gritty occurrences through time. I think there are pros and cons to matriarchy and patriarchy, in fact I think we can take something from both and find a more healthy balance, in reinterpreting masculinity and femininity, or better yet, not interpreting them strictly, and leaving room for interpretation (ie letting people just be themselves). Because let's face it, there's a wide scale of variation in gender norms, and I think we've just been pigeon-holing people unnecessarily into "traditional" norms, and it's time we stopped that and became more flexible.

 

[74x12]

This indicates you don't understand the constructs I'm discussing. Masculinity isn't something concrete that can be "at fault" - it's a concept, defined in different ways, according to the culture, religion, environment it exists in.
If there's something "at fault" with sexual violence, it's with those who perpetuate it individually. Constructs like masculinity contribute depending on how they are defined, they can't said to be "at fault" though.
I'm not looking to assign blame to concepts or constructs, I'm looking to actually discuss them and how they are defined, so if you're looking to make blanket statements such as the above, just move on.

You can't make provocative statements about the Bible and masculinity in general and not expect to be challenged. You actually threw down the gauntlet first in my opinion.

You're (along with the rest of society) headed for some kind of wacky androgynous wonderland. Men are not bad just for being manly; they can be good and manly. But boys growing up are taught a warped view of what manliness is.

We live in an immoral society that now subscribes to a fabricated, false moral system. Children aren't taught morality anymore as they should be. So no surprise that they grow up to do such things.

 

[TruthSeeker1]

Yours is only one perspective.
"Along with the rest of society" is a ridiculous generalizing statement, so don't really expect me to engage with you anymore. If you can't appreciate nuance or engage with people on a level where you don't automatically assume that they are throwing down a challenge, and therefore they must be challenged, I'm not going to engage with you. I've met those types before, and it never goes anywhere, because they are listening to reply instead of listening to understand.

I haven't thrown down any gauntlet. Just go and read the Old Testament, and pay attention.

 

[dfnj]

I would love to hear about your thoughts or experiences on these issues/questions.

There are different types of masculinity as claimed in this terrific piece on mature masculinity:

The audio quality is not very good but that's what you get for free.

 

[Revoltingest]

Recently there has been a lot of discussion among the Canadian media in particular about sexual assaults that have come to light at an all boys private school in Toronto. After this incident, some professional hockey players have also disclosed their own experiences with hazing. This got me thinking about sexual violence, and not just what we typically hear about, that of violence by men against women, but also violence by men against men. And that got me thinking about masculinity, and how it's defined, and how much do these definitions contribute to what's considered acceptable, and what isn't. The article that got me thinking was this one, for anyone interested I loved being class president at St. Mike’s. Here’s what it is getting wrong | The Star

The questions that I'm interested in are, how much do notions about what it is to be masculine, contribute to sexual violence, or validate it? How much are norms of masculinity changing? Are they really, even though there is a lot of talk about how it's more acceptable for men to be compassionate, and express emotion, instead of being tough and reserved? Is chauvinism, the attitude that men are superior to women, still relatively entrenched among men? Is sexual violence (hazing, outright sexual abuse) by men against men more acceptable to men then violence by men against women? If so, why is this?
Another aspect that interests me is the intersectionality with religion, and the ways in which religious beliefs have molded the notion of masculinity, and encouraged chauvinism. The Christian Bible is an excellent example of male chauvinism, with the violence perpetuated towards women in the OT, the fact that no women are given any voice in the Bible, and the teachings of Paul in particular in the NT, regarding the role of women. Christianity has definitely had a significant impact in western nations in regards to gender norms and roles and what it is to be masculine and feminine. Is it fair to conclude that private religious institutions are necessarily behind the times (since they cling to traditional norms based on religious texts, for example) and are still encouraging norms about masculinity which are ultimately harmful not only to women but to other men as well?
How much do those who leave religion, particularly men, reflect on the way that religion has impacted and likely continues to impact their norms of what it is to be a man, and masculinity? Some men clearly continue with very chauvinistic patterns, while others become more aware of how they have been shaped by their environment and beliefs, and actively try to change them.

I would love to hear about your thoughts or experiences on these issues/questions.

I think it's a general acceptance of violence, particularly men on men & women on men.
While much more frowned upon if men on women or anyone on children, any violence
which is tolerated will bleed over into other areas.

 

[InChrist]

I have known good Christians, and terrible, abusive Christians.
I'm also an atheist.
I tend to think those who are religious, can abuse terribly (and misuse religion) in doing so, or act in a positive, healthy way. Do I think religion (satan or another fairy entity) inspires them? No. I think they act according to personal choice, and in both cases, good or bad, they use religion as the justification for their actions. "Satan did it, satan convinced me" has been used as an incredibly convenient justification to excuse oneself from one's personal responsibility and terrible behavior down through the ages.

I don't deny personal responsibility, nor do I think "Satan made me do it" is an excuse for human wickedness or abusive treatment of others. I'm just saying I believe Satan is the ultimate abuser and this malevolent being inspires those who already have an attitude of exalting themselves over others to assume it is their right and to exercise such behavior whenever and wherever they can. Religion has often been used as a hammer in the hands of those with this kind of entitlement mentality over others.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I think a big cause of this is masculinity based on insecurity, where you feel the need to "prove" yourself as a man and to challenge other men. When a person is secure and happy with who they are, they don't typically act in such reckless ways.

 

[TruthSeeker1]

I think a big cause of this is masculinity based on insecurity, where you feel the need to "prove" yourself as a man and to challenge other men. When a person is secure and happy with who they are, they don't typically act in such reckless ways.

I agree completely. If you are secure in yourself, regardless of gender, you will not need to challenge any others or come to an immediate defense of yourself or your "ingroup", whoever that is, and you will treat others with respect and let them be themselves.

 

[TruthSeeker1]

I don't deny personal responsibility, nor do I think "Satan made me do it" is an excuse for human wickedness or abusive treatment of others. I'm just saying I believe Satan is the ultimate abuser and this malevolent being inspires those who already have an attitude of exalting themselves over others to assume it is their right and to exercise such behavior whenever and wherever they can. Religion has often been used as a hammer in the hands of those with this kind of entitlement mentality over others.

I do not think he inspires them. People do horribly things in the name of "godly love" as well - claiming to know what god asks of other people, how they must act to please god, how they are offending god, or better yet, how a person must treat other people, to please god. The Christian religion is very much about being "godly" - and the ways in which people use and abuse this are many and varied.

It is simply astounding, how many people in this world can speak for an invisible being there is no evidence for outside of the bible (and I do not take the bible as evidence), and apparently know his mind.