"Women have to realise that men's weakness is their sexuality, so women have that sort of power."

What the hell? Put out or he'll kill you and it'll be your fault? Fuck this.

The mind boggles.

More accurate headline:

"Ridiculous articles [like this one] to blame for feminist suicides?"

I'm at a loss.

what the fuck??

this is real? people think this is legitimate?? what is he backing these claims on? WHAT THE FUCK?!?!?

Oh, nevermind the fact that a few days ago, it was men - regardless of their religion -- who manipulated mentally ill women into blowing themselves up at a Baghdad pet market, right? When I first saw this headline, I misread and thought it had something to do with Muslim women being used as suicide bombers (for the benefit of Muslim men, too). Sadly, it's instead about shifting blame once again ...

In other words, if women suffer violence at the hands of men, it's becuase women asked for it.

I've love to take this guy to listen to counseling sessions for victims of domestic violence, rape victims, etc.

Instead of blaming PATRIARCHY for these "male disadvantages" they blame WOMEN?!?! Ahhhhh!!!

Wow. That makes me want to barf.

It almost sounds like these men can't cope with their jealousy of women in traditional women's roles:
* the ability to deal with their emotions more effectively (and therefore mock their stupid man who is emotionally stunted),
* taking care of the home and being all nurturing and shit (while the men come home from that outside world and have no place to feel safe and loved),
* and of course women have the simplicity of using the female body sexually to get what they want (while the men just work for it or something boring like that).

What the fuck are these anthropologists thinking?
*sigh*

Okay, this article is kind of a bit insane. I do, however, find some of the observations interesting.

"Men cannot compete on that level, and the next thing for them to do is to lash out physically with violence."

I mean, that's accurate, and so is the bit about men's sexuality being our weakness, but then the article's all like, "See what you make us do to you, baby?" It's pretty villainous, using an abusers logic to blame women for our flaws.

I kept thinking "this has to be a joke. PLEASE tell me this is a parody."

So is it safe to finally say that men are truly the weaker sex? J/k.

All joking aside, this stems from patriarchal reasoning. Seriously. Read arguments that some Christian fundamentalists make as far as women being responsible for turning men on (whether it be on purpose or not). Oh no, the guy can't claim responsibility. In fact, doesn't this krap ring true with the supposed Islamic fundamentalists?

Then have men express their emotions freely. Oh wait, that'd be too gay.

BS.

One thing is correct: "Women have grown up without restrictions on expressing their emotions and so they are more emotionally developed than most men . . ." And yes, society (not just women, but men, too) tells men they shouldn't express their emotions -- that it's not a manly thing to do -- and yes, such gender stereotyping is obviously a problem for men, and no doubt it can cause problems when men act out.

But, it's a quantum, intolerable leap to blame women for men's violence against women or men because of that. The vast majority of men are able to control their aggression and their sexual urges, thank you, and women are not responsible for those men who won't.

Eradicating gender stereotypes that force men to act like "real men" -- something classical feminism completely agrees with -- would help men become better adjusted.

One women's manipulation is another woman's survival strategy. That's right, I said it. Don't underestimate the patriarchy.

Did that asshole got his Anthropology degree from a cereal box?

The article is lame because of the way it places blame on women and says, basically, that we've seen "enough" social support for women, but the notion that we need to re-imagine masculinity shouldn't be lost. If teaching that masculinity isn't limited to a traditional stoic, non-emotive role can help reduce violence against women, then I'm all for it. It's just silly to suggest that we can't look critically and constructively at ALL culturally paradigmatic gender roles.

SURE women have grown up without restrictions. And men, you know, have all the pressure to look hot but not slutty, be smart but not actually smarter than the person they're with, and be taught that what they really want is a family and not a career.

Here's my new article title: "Males to Blame for Domestic Violence? (Yeah, he beat/killed her)"

astoundingly retarded, even for anti-feminist drivel.

tim, right on the money.

Aren't we to blame for everything?

Nice disgusting, sexist article about women (they manipulate men and make them feel incompetent and inferior; they "drive" men to violence; they weild supposed "sexual power" over men; they are hostile towards men) AND men (they are easily manipulated by women; they can't express their emotions; they are on the verge of violence at all times; they can't resist this supposed "sexual power" women have over them).

Let's not figure out why some men don't have the ability to cope with emotional issues and instead lash out violently. Nope, it's better to tell women to stop [insert the behavior/attitude/clothing/here] that supposedly "makes" these men kill/abuse/assault/rape them, 'cuz that's worked so far.

The whole article is full of sexist, harmful stereotypes about both genders. I'm not sure how it serves anyone.

Well, at least it, in the crudest of manners, points out how damaging patriarchy is on men, which is often overlooked. Taking away the "you made him do it, hunny!" aspect, the idea that men are violent because they are trained to have no other social outlet for emotions points to a huge danger and flaw in societies that really needs to be addressed. These hack-anthropologists don't do that, of course.

Aside from the obvious victim blaming and other typical sexist stereotypes, it does hold a few tiny shreds of truth.

WTF??!!

Notice that they don't seem to care much about the women who are being killed in these murder-suicides.

I can't even figure out what "manipulation" they're talking about. As far as I can see, all the characteristics of women they mention are good things. Do they think women should pretend to be less than they are to stop provoking the poor menz? Isn't that manipulation?

Another gem from Herbert Gayle, also reported on by Petre Williams in the Jamaica Observer:

UWI’s urban anthropologist Herbert Gayle agreed. While Jamaicans will never accept homosexuality, they may eventually learn to become more tolerant of it—but only if those pushing for tolerance play their cards right, he said.

“I have said to people abroad, if you want Jamaicans to be more tolerant then don’t present homosexuality as an option of sexuality, appeal to the human side of people,� he said. “The tolerance will grow, but (homosexuality) as a sexual option? No. Because it goes right through the politic of who we are.� (emphasis mine)

If you keep thanking readers for insane links, they will keep giving them to you.

Did we just go back in time because it sure feels like it!

I feel like a kid in a candy store because I have so much to bash about this article.

"Women have grown up without restrictions on expressing their emotions and so they are more emotionally developed than most men and pretty much manipulate men and make them feel incompetent and inferior," McGill said.
OKAY? No I never had restrictions…I could express myself anyway I wanted too. Oh WAIT I couldn’t because if I become angry then I am too emotional or if I start crying in public I am too emotional once again. There are definitely restrictions on women’s emotions and there are restrictions on men’s emotions this is why we have feminism to break these stereotypes.

“Women have to realize that men's weakness is their sexuality, so women have that sort of power.�

Really…is he really saying this!!!??? Last time I check men and women could control their sexuality. Lets stop letting men think that they can’t control their libido and that women can control theirs. I think we are all human beings and not animals, and can control ourselves enough to not want to kill or violently hurt someone just because they made you angry!

I know I am preaching to the choir but VAW is something that really gets me going and it just makes me sick to see that some people are still so ignorant and stupid that they have to find ways to justify Violence Against Women.

its a shame that some good points are overridden by a ton of crap.

support systems for men, resocializing them to be able to express emotion in a healthy manner, and the respect issue are what needs to be focused on.

this is especially true for young men, as noted above, if only this had taken the tack of the effect the patriarchy has on all people this could have been some good work.

Please tell me there is some women's group in Jamaica challenging this kind of bullshit...

My favourite bit is at the end: "It boils down to respect. If a man does not feel he is respected, then he will feel intimidated and will lash out - and not only in terms of violence but also in terms of finding someone else who respects him more."

In other words, it important for women to be properly submissive, otherwise men will be forced to kill them, or worse: leave them for another women! Yes, the only way to stop men from killing us is to let them oppress us instead. After all, history shows us that women were never murdered by their male partners back in the good ole pre-uppity women days, right?

This has been a long time coming, and we're going to see more and more of it as MRAs gain ground. I'm all for academic observation, for anthropologists and their ilk identifying shifts and trends, which can sometimes come across as rather dispassionate or cold, but for Gayle/McGill to say "women have to realise that men's weakness is their sexuality" - that's not observing a social 'fact' (such as women are encouraged to express emotion more than men are, etc.) so much as prescribing a remedy - a rather stupid, offensive one at that. My friends (including my mother) who have been raped already learnt that lesson; they're much less manipulative now.

What I would like to know is, why waste time writing an article? Why not just print up business cards, tshirts and bumper stickers that say "Women: it's always your fault when I'm a douche."
Quick and to the point. And if a woman sees a dude with one of these, she can stay away. You know, so she won't be tempted to manipulate him.
*Rolling eyes so far back I am resembling Linda Blair in "The Exorcist."

Okay, not to bring facts or anything into the debate, but don't women attempt suicide at a much higher rate than men?

That doesn't seem to jive well with their hypothesis.

GOOD: Yes, giving men more emotional outlets and tools to deal with their frustration is a good thing.

BAD: Blaming all of men's emotional ills on women is ridiculous.

Hey, I have a crazy idea. Can we agree that a gender construct that pushes men to kill themselves and others if they feel disrespected is toxic and intolerable? Can we agree that a manhood where men can't show emotion until it boils over into violence is wrong?

This and the ficticious boys crisis!
Why is it that professionals use their credentials to attempt to give sly credence to misogyny?!

The website this article came off of is full of nonsense social commentary. I mean, it's a horrible article, but I'm not so surprised or offended by it.

It doesn't appear to be a reputable enough article to warrant my outrage.

I can't tell if this is common for Jamaican publications because I'm ignorant of the culture. Although, I have heard Jamaica is exceptionally homophobic.

A U.S. paper never would have run this headline. Instead, it would have been something about how the "drama" in "tumultuous" relationships can "culminate" in murder-suicide. See how much better that sounds?

I like how we are the ones being "Urged" to change our behavior, and not them for killing themselves/us. On another note, for all those commenters surprised by this article, didn't you know that is ALWAYS the woman's fault? No matter what? Snark.

GopherII, I hate the fictitious boy crisis! I remember Newsweek ran an article on it a few years back and I could not see straight for hours.

My favourite bit is at the end: "It boils down to respect. If a man does not feel he is respected, then he will feel intimidated and will lash out - and not only in terms of violence but also in terms of finding someone else who respects him more."

Yes, I love the idea that women are supposed to respect men who deal with their problems with violence and/or philandering. Why the fuck should anyone value that?

I also noticed that the article didn't cover the fact that killing/abusing/cheating on the woman is DISRESPECTFUL to her? Or is respect only for men?

It doesn't appear to be a reputable enough article to warrant my outrage.

You should be outraged anytime something like this is given credence, even a little. It perpetuates and promotes misogynistic (and, in this case, misandric) ideas. The people that are inclined to believe and regurgitate this kind of crap don't give a fig for reputable.

Mmm. Yes. Men are incapable of controlling their emotions, have no psychological boundaries, can't care for others emotionally, can't maintain a household, and are a constant danger both to themselves and others...

Sounds like there's only one solution: institutionalize men! They clearly are not mentally equipped for participation in civil society.

Translation: women are soooooooo powerful that men can kill them at will and be excused for it in a national newspaper. Save me from ever having that kind of 'power'.

On a more serious note, this is an interesting contrast to the stories from the US media usually written about here. As bad as the latter often are (which is bad), the kind of gut-wrenching tripe we see in this article is not at all uncommon in developing-world media.

How about if a man is being manipulated in a relationship, then he gets the hell out of that relationship instead of killing his s/o? Why not simply acknowledge that the relationship is not working instead of staying in it and killing himself (or her)? Why the hell would anyone stay in a relationship if it was making them want to kill? If I were a psychologist, and my patient was telling me that he had thoughts of killing his wife because of severe manipulation, I'd say he was in a toxic relationship, to get the hell out, and please, please please come back for more therapy because you're having sociopathic thoughts!

If a woman is manipulating a man, then yes, that's screwed up, but who's fault is it if he decides to handle his anger and/or alienation in an unhealthy way such as suicide and/or murder?

'GopherII, I hate the fictitious boy crisis! I remember Newsweek ran an article on it a few years back and I could not see straight for hours.'

Theres a whole forum on amazon.com debating the "boys crisis." This stupid mother wrote a large rant about how her son doesnt do well in school because feminism changed everything. She claimed feminism created an 'anti-boy' environment at her sons school. She never even gave him responsibility for his own failure in school! I did some stat research and found that boys habitually forget to do their homework and come prepared to class, but yet its so much easier to blame women! The boys crisis is just a made up claim by those who want to erode feminism.

I think the most interesting part is that the article correctly paints guys for who we are, but then blames the women for our violent behavior. Men are emotional cripples, nothing can change that, but it is our responsibility as men to figure out how to deal with it, be it through anger management or just staying away from women, rather than women's responsibility to avoid doing whatever arbitrary thing might set us off.

As a psychologist, I often have to jump in when I feel that bad media report has twisted the results of valid research to appear sexist. However, you will hear no defenses from me this time. These people are spouting CRAP here. These people must be the Jamaican equivalent of "Dr." Laura.

To defend the fields of Psychology and Archeology a little, the Psychologists who spoke here (one agreeing with this argument, one disagreeing) seem to be counselors. No offense to counseling psychologists, but their comments are likely to be more based on personal observation and interpretation (which is open to more bias) than any generally accepted research and theorizing. The Archaeologist (in other articles sometimes quoted as a sociologist) also seems to be commenting outside his field(s) domain, meaning its mostly opinion.

Not to sound too ethnocentric, but we all know women have a much harder time in less modern countries. It is not the least bit surprising to have "authority" figures making very sexist statements. I think when we focus on the issues still ahead, many people almost forget the progress they have made in this country and other westernized nations to make such blatant sexist thinking unacceptable among academics and most authority figures.