Dear Ally Fogg, Start your own Counting Dead Men Project …

Dear Ally Fogg,

Please start your own Start your own Counting Dead Men Project. I am so incredibly bored of you derailing the amazing work Karen Ingala Smith and other women are doing tracking male violence against women and girls in order to shriek “whatta bout the menz”

It was completely unnecessary for you to respond to this:

Screen Shot 2014-10-01 at 10.23.41 with:

Screen Shot 2014-10-01 at 10.20.55

We all know the vast majority of violence against women and girls is committed by men. We know the vast majority of women and girls murdered are killed by men – most of whom the victims know personally. We know men are the majority of perpetrators of domestic violence against women, children and other men. We all know that in the rare cases of female on male homicide, that many (if not most) of the female perpetrators kill men who are abusing them. We also all know that Ingala Smith is tracking women killed by men, so your complaint is just ridiculous.

If you genuinely care about male victims of violence, stop derailing conversations about male violence against women and girls and start your own Counting Dead Men Project. I’m sure if you ask Ingala Smith politely, she will give you some top tips on the best ways to research the data on women who kill men.  To make it as accurate as Ingala Smith’s Counting Dead Women Project, you will need to ensure you include more than just names. You will need to include whether or not the male victims had a history of domestic violence.

You could even start a Counting Dead Men Project which includes EVERY single male victim of homicide so we could see that the vast majority of men are killed by other men. But, we all know you won’t bother doing this. It’s far easier to derail conversations about the reality of male violence to whine than it is to actually do the work Karen Ingala Smith does: giving a name to the women who are murdered every month.

If you can prove that women kill two men a week and that these women did not kill a violent current or former partner in self-defence, then I might stop thinking your an MRE. We all know you can’t prove this though.

Stewie

P.S I’ve storified some of the great feminist response to Fogg here.

COUNTING DEAD WOMEN PETITION

2 thoughts on “Dear Ally Fogg, Start your own Counting Dead Men Project …”

  1. You know that AllyF has been doing this *for years*. Way back in the early days of CIF and on the feminist blogs that were around at that time, ongoing attempts to sabotage women’s work – particularly women who speak out about male violence against women – under the guise of been oh-so-concerned about Real Equality.

    Here’s an example for you on Cath Elliot’s blog

    http://toomuchtosayformyself.com/2009/03/08/new-proposals-to-tackle-violence-against-women

    where he pops into the comments with the same old line or talking point as he puts it. But it’s a complete derail: “well of course vaw is bad but let’s talk about men and how it’s all much more nuanced than the feminist idealogues are claiming, and why can’t we talk about women’s violence against men, and I’m just trying to be reasonable and balanced blah blah blah” (paraphrase – but read the thread, note also how he shows his contempt for women in the comment where he complains that male violence, towards women that he knows, doesn’t benefit him as he had to look after said women and deal with the fallout of their trauma, and that was terrible – for him !)

    He uses his platform in the to guardian expound some more

    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2009/mar/10/women-domestic-violence

    Here’s one commenter on the CIF article who has him sussed:

    “The Home Office launches a consultation “Together we can end violence against women” and up pops AllyF like a boy excluded from his sister’s birthday party, to stamp and shout about it not being “Together we can end violence against men and women”.

    Deja Vu. (his reponse to Emma Watson)

    Read his comment on Joan Smith’s piece

    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2009/mar/15/ukcrime-justice#comment-2103444

    This is a man who thinks that being accused of being raped is worse than being raped, that “false accusations” have devastating consequences for men – not merely as bad as being assaulted, but worse.

    More recently he gives a speech to a men’s rights group where he talks about the problem “between supporting the right to justice of victims of rape and the rights of men who may have been wrongly accused of the crime. ” As if it were some sort of 50/50 issue

    http://hetpat.wordpress.com/2012/11/09/intertwined-reconciling-the-mens-movement-with-feminism-speech-transcript/

    You could dip into more or less anything he writes for yet more of the same.

    The links here are just a tiny snapshot – and to show you that five and a bit years later he continues with the “just want a reasonable debate/ just concerned for men and boys” pretence while primarily going after women who try to make a difference for female victims of male violence.

    He really is a grade A shit-stirrer and misogynist, he does not want genuine engaement and however much people get sucked into trying to present a case to him he will continue to bang his poor oppressed men and woman-blaming drum and his record shows that.

  2. Should women apportion any time or effort in respect of male victimhood of IPV; male pre-mature death; suicide; etc etc.

    Arguably no, because it is ultimately the responsibility of the patriarchy to address the consequences of its actions upon its own. If women, in defending themselves or in asserting their rights cause injury or death to men that is a natural consequence of the existence of the patriarchy.

    However, as was highlighted in the late 1990’s initiatives to address these issues, it is the loss to HM Treasury of income from being able to tax men’s salaries that poses a major risk to the UK’s social welfare & health programmes. The 20% of premature death among males between 35 and 55 causes not only a loss of income, it increases the burden on the state to provide welfare for the dependent women and children.

    While anyone may have individual emotional responses to known men’s life experiences, to develop a rational national and global strategy an objective stance must be adopted. For a certain proportion of men their loss of life is societally irrelevant as they are dependent on the state and consume resources that would be better deployed supporting women. (Every man who exists permanently on the dole effectively denies a female victim of IPV of the support services to which she should be entitled).

Leave a Reply