Male violence against women must be exposed and eradicated

Just calling it Male on Female violence doesn't speak to the fact that many men are also victims of violence by other men. Yes, women are the majority of victims in gender-based violence, but violent masculinity also takes other men who are deemed 'gay' or 'too feminine' as victims as well.

Why don't we just call it patriarchy?

In April of 2006, the City's Commission for the Prevention of Violence Against Women delivered a disturbing
and well-researched report on forcible rape of women and attempted forcible rape of women in Santa Cruz.

For the 2 years extensively studied (2003 and 2004), they showed that the forcible rape rate in Santa Cruz
is FOUR TIMES the STATE AVERAGE!!

see: http://www.ci.santa-cruz.ca.us/cc/archives/06/4-25meeting/4-25rpt/cm253.htm

"Rate of reported rape is higher in the City of Santa Cruz than comparative cities, counties, surrounding regions, and the State of California. The 2004 rate in Santa Cruz is 2.10 per 1,000 females. The rate in California is .53 per 1,000 females."

"Reported rapes in the City of Santa Cruz increased by 96% from 1984 to 2004. Reported rapes in California decreased by 18% during the same period."

"Arrest rate for rape in Santa Cruz in 2004 was 18%. Nationally, 42% of reported rapes were cleared by arrest in 2004 (FBI data)."

BECKY: Cynthia Mathews is SUPPOSED to be a famous advocate for women. Yet here she is burying the results of this study, opting to take refer it to committee for further study, most likely to curry the favor of Chamber of Commerce types who don't want bad news to affect the tourist business.

MIKE ROTKIN has been off and off the council since 1979. In this period rapes of women increased 96%!! What has he done to assure women's safety?

On April 25, 2006, against the recommendation of the CPVAW, Rotkin spoke against setting up a blue-ribbon task force to study the issue more thoroughly
and make further recommendations. Instead, he voted with the council to dump the findings into the public safety committee, which he chairs.

see: http://www.ci.santa-cruz.ca.us/cc/archives/06/mins_pdf/4-25min.pdf (item # 23)

Here is what happened at that public safety committee meeting (Mathews did not attend) :

http://www.ci.santa-cruz.ca.us/cm/cpvaw/2006/jcsa/action/052206d.pdf

"Rotkin explained the work of the committee was not to "reinvent the wheel" as the CPVAW had already accomplished
much work and the committee hopes to augment and build on this prior work."

BECKY: Rotkin is willing to rest on his laurels---ignoring the clear and present danger to women in Santa Cruz.

"Rotkin expressed concern that more studies would not provide a definite answer regarding the data"

BECKY: The council voted for "more study" yet here Rotkin is opposing even that.

"Rotkin reminded the committee that the SCPD is struggling with open positions."

BECKY: Again a rationale for doing nothing. Certainly the council and the police department could issue a press release
which warns Santa Cruz women of the increased danger from rapists. Rotkin preferred to bury it in committee where
few will see the light of day. And what does Rotkin have to say about the unusually low rate of prosecutions?

Nothing!!!

Regarding the question "Why not just call it patriarchy"- Male violence against women is the most widespread atrocity against the largest oppressed group of human beings—women.

Child abuse, elder abuse, and abuses in dysfunctional gay and lesbian relationships are all forms of "domestic violence" However, each abuse is being dealt with *specifically* by concerned groups and therapists that specialize in each kind of abuse.

Male violence against women must also be separated out from other forms of domestic violence and dealt with *specifically" Mary Daly said that naming the agent is necessary to eradicate atrocity. Calling it MALE violence against women names men as the agent AND
specifically focuses on them, not non violent men who do not abuse women. Hence, its not a "male bash"

Also, male violence against women also is inflicted upon women outside the home. Women all over the world can not walk alone at night or in isolated areas without fear of men raping them. Also, men organized more than 50 rape camps in wartime Bosnia where girls, teens and adult women were forced into sexual slavery and often raped to death.

Rape is business as usual during war in which men rape "enemy" women to demoralize enemy men. Men in armies use rape as a war tactic

Even Amnesty International, which calls it "a global scourge" tiptoes around and does NOT name MEN as the agents of male violence against women. They just call it "violence"

If people are not afraid to call racism and child abuse exactly what it is, why the hesitation of calling it MALE violence against women?

If groups want to address male violence against men, they can do so.

I choose to focus on male violence aganst women because it affects me and all women of all races directly.

Men have been the overwhelming primary souce of womens suffering for more than 5,000 thousand years.

Its time to talk about male violence against women instead of switching the conversation to "mens violence against men" etc

I agree that male violence also touches many male lives as men use their brute force to humiliate and injure some men as well as many women.

This Patriarchal system reinforces itself with a "no questions allowed" policy regarding its membership.

Case in point: Feminist and historian Bettina Aptheker has recently written a book that describes the childhood sexual abuse she suffered from her father, famed Socialist and writer, Herbert Aptheker. Instead of supporting her, there are many "left" men who are actually criticizing her, claiming that she doesn't know what she is talking about, that somehow this is a result of repressed memory sydrome, or some other bullshit term. For these men, accepting that this abuse took place would be to "let down" their unquestioning to their #1 allegiance --- male power or Patriarchy.

In the same way, so-called Progressives at UCSC have set up a night to celebrate the life of a famous child molester at their campus on December 21. Woody Allen, who all but fully admits that he molested the child whom he acted as a functional guardian for nine years, is scheduled to play jazz for their "Arts and Lectures" series that evening, despite the very obvious fact that he is a mediocre musician at best. Why is this? Because the so-called "Progressives" who support him really aren't as devoted to the idea of "progress" as much as they are to the maintenance of the Patriarchy status-quo.

I agree with Freeda's comment: So-called "Progressives" . . . "really aren't as devoted to the idea of "progress" as much as they are to the maintenance of the Patriarchy status-quo"

Regarding Freeda's comment on "male violence against men", "progressive" men safely attack racism (a form of male violence against men) because it is good PR and does NOT threaten male supremacy —since ending racism primarily benefits MEN of color. Women of color may benefit only as a side effect of "progressive" men who fight racism.

However, even if ALL racism was eradicated, men of color would still rape, batter and murder women of color. I dont see too many "progressive" men protesting MALE violence against women of color.

"Progressive" men are silent on the issue of sexism. I dont see millions of "progressive" men organizing to end MALE violence against ALL women of ALL races This is because they dont want to lose their male priviledge.