this won’t get 1% of the women’s version of this post.
the world we live in, and people in general don’t care about men. we are pretty much robots who aren’t allowed to show emotion. we’re taught from a young age that boys don’t cry.
fact is women are sexualised, men are idealised. because men can’t be raped because they’re big and strong right? right? yea, pretty much the idiots view of living.
signal boost this shit
reblogging because I cannot stand when people act like women are the only things in the world
how about you stop using tragic stories of men who were raped just to get a dig in at women? you shouldn’t be reblogging this because ‘people act like women are the only things in the world’ you should be reblogging it because these men deserve to have their stories told and we need more awareness for male rape.
stop using the horrible, violently wrong and tragic things that happened to these man to turn this into a sly dig at women.
that “idiots view of living” in which men are seen as too “strong” for rape is exactly the sort of patriarchal idea that feminism tries to fight, but i’m sure you knew that already
I have honestly seen this post (with either the same commentary or pretty similar variations on it) more than the corresponding versions with women, reblogged from feminists/allies/etc and others who politically align themselves in that way. This is pretty much the only time I’ve seen it even get pretty much any criticism.
Male sexual abuse survivor reporting in here to tell you it’s trash. Just my own personal experiences (admittedly as a White! and a cis! and otherwise a “good”! survivor!) is that it kind of reminds me of how many mental health people and counselors and other professionals I ended up talking with about my sexualized abuse who almost always launched into a “if I don’t prioritize this, no one else will and this case will get forgotten” spiel. In retrospect, I’m pretty sure I got better treatment and more attention because of this rhetoric, to a certain extent at the cost of people who had experienced worse and needed more.
Just, given those experiences, it seems to me that the rhetorical choices here are no longer (if they ever actually were) between people who don’t think men get raped/abused/etc and people who do, but between people who think that that’s the choice and so we must prioritize male survivors/victims who will otherwise be forgotten and people who think that doubting and silencing survivors/victims comes in a variety of flavors that interact with gender (read, assigned, or lived) in a whole litany of ways a bit more complicated and nuanced than that.
Looking over these images, they don’t strike me as revealing much that’s absent from the versions with women - there’s insistence on what gender a person is, on what that’s supposed to mean, how that’s supposed to guarantee people a right to someone else’s body, a manipulative attempt to transfer responsibility on to them, and subsequent validation of those violent acts by the rape culture we live in. I wouldn’t say the fact that (all of? more on that shortly) these people are men is irrelevant to how they have been attacked, but on the whole this doesn’t seem like it needs to be understood as needing to be called a uniquely male/masculine set of experiences.
It really isn’t clear why this set of images from the larger project needs to be elevated and particularly focused on, unless you want to take a project about allowing survivors/victims to voice themselves and manage their voices to your own personal politics, which again, are overtly about the prioritization of men in survivor/victim narratives largely at the cost of women and even non-binary survivors/victims.
About whether all of these people are guys, and the one with the slur on it… I understand that as being the story of a trans guy (who to be clear, if a trans guy, is a guy, a man, male, etc) but explained with a specifically transmisogynist slur. That doesn’t make it unimportant or “wrong” or anything like that, but the fact that transmisogynist language has to be used to describe how men have it bad… kind of indicates how little of this is actually “misandry” or what the fuck ever in the commentary added in the early reblogs. Looking through the origin of this photoset there’s even more images like that, which make it clear that reading these people as women/feminine (whether they’re afab or amab) was often a part of legitimizing these attacks:
And what’s more, there’s another mysteriously forgotten one that didn’t specifically involve that but overtly called for solidarity with women who are survivors of rape and abuse:
So, to review, what the OP on this did is remove all but one of the images of people (who seem to have been read/declared as guys by BuzzFeed of all places) that referenced misogyny (either [mis]directed at them or directed at others) as a part of the violence they experienced. That primed the way for people to rush in demanding that this photoset be signal boosted and otherwise made visible and valued.
Now what does that tell us?