Violence Towards Men, Homeless or Otherwise
Men have long been the most frequent victims of violence and the most severe violence. While feminists don slut clothes to march demanding safety from attack on the streets (and fair enough too), the truth is that a sole male out on the streets of our cities at night is more at risk of violent attack than is a sole woman. She may be at risk of sexual assault from small proportions of men and women who would do that, but he will be at risk from the greater proportion of men and women who would not assault a woman but would see it as sport to ‘take on’ a man and subject him to some concentrated expression of their general anger. Over recent decades, promotion by feminist groups and indeed our governments of an attitude of blame and denigration towards males has worked very effectively to reduce empathy and understanding towards men and has encouraged both men and women to view the male gender as worthless and deserving of hatred, disregard or violence.
An especially horrible example of this has been violent attacks on homeless men. Three of those attacks over the last year have been fatal, the most recent example arising last weekend when the body of violently-attacked 49yo Maqbool Hussain was found where he was sleeping rough behind a shop in Balmoral, Auckland.
Maqbool Hussain’s back story was unpleasantly familiar to many men. His wife left him, plundered his assets and the business he had built up, and abducted his children back to her country of origin. He will still have received heartless demands for so-called ‘child support’. Whatever extent to which he may already have had a drinking problem, these losses appeared to have driven him to a life of destitution and self-medication for his emotional pain. Women can legally steal a large proportion of the fruits of a man’s labour then enslave him ongoing, and they are frequently allowed to wreck his relationship with his children as well. She simply has to point a finger at him with unsubstantiated allegations in order to have many basic civil rights stripped from him and/or have him treated by society as a leper thereafter. If she assaults or kills him this is likely to be seen as relatively ok and his own fault. Like all other areas in which men are disadvantaged (e.g. homelessness, addictions, imprisonment rates and conditions, severity of sentences, life-span, workplace injury and death, fatal illness, suicide, military deaths), legalized exploitation of and violence towards men by women is minimized or ignored by media and most in society. But these are all simply representations of the same misandry that leads people to think it’s ok to violently attack or kill vulnerable homeless men.
A very fair and thought provoking argument.
Comment by andrew — Thu 27th March 2014 @ 2:19 pm
well said , and that’s exactly how things are and have been for a long time now at a horrible cost, so biased system, I am coming for you with a vengeance, thank you for giving me something right to believe in and action.
Comment by Dominic Dilligaf — Thu 27th March 2014 @ 2:19 pm
It also seems that some people believe it is OK to beat disabled men to death if a woman claims rape.
According to the Crown:
The jury is currently deliberating.
Comment by JohnPotter — Thu 27th March 2014 @ 3:04 pm
The sentence will be an interesting one. Whenever you read or hear a news article about sentencing the judge seems to have a requirement or need to take into account the reason(s) why someone committed the crime they have been found guilty of.
I fear an allegation that Glen Jones committed rape will be taken into account and a massive discount will be given to these murders. Giving such a discount only confirms that allegations of rape are as good as rape.
It remains to be seen if the home invasion punishment will apply.
Comment by Lukenz — Fri 28th March 2014 @ 9:25 pm
#4 I’d be willing to bet money that the woman/women get lighter sentences.
Comment by golfa — Sat 29th March 2014 @ 3:33 pm
golfa #5: Yes, almost certainly and for no good reason. Let’s take a punt; I say the female sentences combined will amount to no more than two thirds of the male sentences combined.
Comment by Ministry of Men's Affairs — Sat 29th March 2014 @ 3:36 pm
Opinion piece by Rosemary McLeod on the Glen Jones murder
Comment by Downunder — Thu 3rd April 2014 @ 9:11 am
Sentencing:
One of the isolated incidents where there is no choice but to give a woman the same sentence as her male co-offenders.
Comment by Downunder — Fri 30th May 2014 @ 12:10 pm
Yes, this sentencing is further evidence of a sea change that has started. We have brought it about through our thinking, writing, agitating, submissions etc. The occasional judge is starting to realise that it’s no longer acceptable to keep showing blatant favour towards females. Gender equality will come as a shock to feminists.
It is a reassuring case also because the motivation for the murder was punishment of a male for allegedly upsetting a female. The murderers’ supporters were reported to voice objection to the sentences and this was probably because many people still believe that violence towards a male is justified when it’s retribution on behalf of a female. Many judges in NZ would have seen that as a mitigating factor. Justice MacKenzie is to be commended.
However, we may not have seen the last of this case and there is plenty of opportunity yet for our justice system to find a way to grant some degree of pussy pass.
Comment by Man X Norton — Fri 30th May 2014 @ 12:50 pm
when will this end I am the mother of 2 children who’s father was involved I am deeply sorry for mr jones family and it never should have happened my children are under the age of 8 and are being punished and bullied for an action their father did they are innocent in all of this as well when will people learn that we to have to deal with the events of that night and it being spread everywhere does not make it easier
Comment by no name — Tue 3rd February 2015 @ 4:14 pm