Women could reduce rape and abuse if they’d just stop avoiding marriage. Or so says Phyllis Schlafly. Why should we listen, or care?
—
Words can be dangerous things, even when you dismiss them. And words, backed up by statistics can be even more dangerous. Because unless you check your premise, it’s easy to drink the Kool-aide instead of getting to the juicy, but often bitter, truth.
But, as my dear friend Bob Burg, has often been heard to say, “Even the best logic, if based on a false premise, must result in an incorrect conclusion.“
But what is the premise of Schlafly’s statement exactly?
“We all know that married men can still be violent to their families, but they are far less likely to be violent against women than are live-in boyfriends.
Why is this? It’s true that women who have found men who are already better partners are more likely to marry them, but it’s also true that marriage settles men down. Being married makes a man care more about his family’s expectations and future because he sees his family as enduring. It also makes him more faithful and committed to his partner. Marriage makes men directly protective of their wives, and living in a home with their daughters gives them the opportunity to be directly protective of them as well. Marriage also creates indirect protection for wives and daughters, because married women and their children tend to live in safer neighborhoods.Don’t like ads? Become a supporter and enjoy The Good Men Project ad freeSo what’s the answer for women who worry about male violence? It’s not to fear all men. It’s to reject the lifestyle of frequent “hookups,” which is so much promoted on college campuses today, while the women pursue a career and avoid marriage.”
(It’s available on Soundcloud if you prefer to listen to the recording.)
Nowhere in this statement does she address the incidents of married men raping and abusing women outside of their family …
|
Her first premise is that “married men can still be violent to their families, but are far less likely to be violent against women than are live-in boyfriends.”
The logic she uses to support this statement is that, once married, a man feels protective toward his wife and daughters, and will not only be less likely to abuse them, but will, in fact protect them against other abusers. But she takes the conclusion from a married man’s attitude toward the women in his family, and attempts to extend it to the idea that married men are less likely to be violent toward all women.
Nowhere in this statement does she address the incidents of married men raping and abusing women outside of their family, but she extends this into her second premise which is that, “it’s also true that marriage settles men down.” She then attempts to support that statement by giving reasons that men settle down after marriage — that the man cares more about his family’s expectations and future, he becomes more faithful and committed to his partner, he becomes protective of his wife and daughters, and (I suppose because the man brings affluence?) his family is more likely to live in a safer neighborhood.
◊♦◊
Finally, she reaches her conclusion, based on these premises, that women don’t need to fear all men. They just need to “reject the lifestyle of frequent “hookups,” which is so much promoted on college campuses today, while the women pursue a career and avoid marriage.”
That’s the conclusion I heard. That’s the answer she offers women today. Get married, and it’s all good. Live with someone, or have casual sex, and “men will be men.”
|
How does that really break down? If women wouldn’t hook up with men they would have nothing to fear? If women would stop avoiding marriage in favor of education and careers they would have nothing to fear? If women would marry someone who would protect them they would have nothing to fear? Because women don’t need to fear all men, just men who want to hook up with them instead of marrying them? And if they’re married, then they “belong” to someone who will protect them so it’s all good there too?
That’s the conclusion I heard. That’s the answer she offers women today. Get married, and it’s all good. Live with someone, or have casual sex, and “men will be men.”
◊♦◊
Her conclusion ignores the fact that many marriages end in divorce because of an abusive partner (and isn’t always the man.)
And finally, it ignores the fact that women should not fear all men, because men are just people.
|
It ignores the fact that there are many partnerships that are respectful, loving, mutually protective and supportive, fully committed, and not bound by any form of marriage. It ignores the fact that rape and abuse stem from deeper issues than “I don’t see this as enduring.” It ignores the fact that even women who are married to a highly protective partner are not with that partner all the time. It ignores the fact that sexual hookups are not “promoted on college campuses” but have been part of the coming of age ritual for all young people since at least the 60’s, and have been part of the male coming of age ritual much longer.
It ignores the fact that any man a woman should fear when he is not married is not a man any woman should marry. It ignores the fact that women deserve to pursue their education and career and an active sex life in equal measure to their male counterparts and in equal safety. It ignore the fact that men aren’t safe either — women are not the only abuse survivors and men are not the only abuse perpetrators.
And finally, it ignores the fact that women should not fear all men, because men are just people. Like any other generalization, there are people whom you have cause to fear, and people you don’t have cause to fear. And it’s darned hard to tell the difference, but making that decision based on gender is the most “incorrect conclusion” I can imagine.
◊♦◊
Why is her premise and conclusion so dangerous?
As The Good Men Project writer and Ethics Editor, Thomas G Fiffer says, “Statistics can be used—and twisted—to support almost any argument. Schlafly is clever, in that she starts off with “proof” that marriage somehow makes men behave better, then blames women for the abuse they suffer outside of marriage and uses that hammer to advance her anti-feminist agenda. Male abusers abuse women whether they are girlfriends or wives, and one of the hallmarks of an abuser is the effort to trap the victim, often through marriage, children, and financial dependence.“
He went on to say, “What I’m saying is that abuse is a pattern. It is perpetrated by abusive people and endured by people those abusers ensnare with a variety of lies, the most devastating of which is that they love them. So marriage in and of itself, despite Phyllis’s argument, is not the answer. Better behavior is the answer. Empowering victims to report abuse and protecting them when they do so is the answer. Creating a culture of respect is the answer.”
One of our writers felt that the full gift of self could only be made through marriage, while others believed that marriage could as easily act as bondage as it could a bond.
|
One of the things I love about working with the writers and editors here at The Good Men Project is the range of viewpoints and the level of diversity represented. In our discussion there were many stories from those who had seen and experienced abuse within a marriage, who had witnessed, in long term same-sex and opposite-sex couples who were not married the kind of relationship that Ms. Schlafly attributes only to marriage. One of our writers felt that the full gift of self could only be made through marriage, while others believed that marriage could as easily act as bondage as it could a bond.
I’m more concerned about the fairytale world this message suggests.
|
Most, like Thomas, pointed out that better behavior is the answer, and expressed concern that the premises and conclusion in Ms. Schlafly’s message would be accepted by women as another form of victim blaming.
◊♦◊
I think we’ve gotten pretty hardened to victim blaming. I’m more concerned about the fairytale world this message suggests.
“Girls, if he’s a little abusive, just marry him. He’ll settle down once he knows your relationship is enduring, and he’ll become that white knight protector you always dreamed of. He’ll look after you and your children, he’ll buy you a house in a safer neighborhood, and you won’t have to put your career first, or worry about being abused or raped, because you’re a married women.”
Let’s shoot for a New American Dream. One where no one, regardless of age, gender, race, or religion, needs to fear all of the people of any other age, gender, race, or religion.
|
Sound familiar? The old American Dream: Married with children and two cars in the garage which is attached to the house with the fenced backyard and the nice neighbors across the street.
Let’s shoot for a New American Dream. One where no one, regardless of age, gender, race, or religion, needs to fear all of the people of any other age, gender, race, or religion.
Yes, let’s listen to what Phyllis Schlafly says. And let’s care enough to make it completely irrelevant and immaterial.
—
Photo: Flickr/Tony Alter
Phyllis Schlafley’s article is more of an insult to men than it is to women!
why?
please explain further, because i’m not insulted at all by it
The implication that men are only good, faithful, and protective IF they’re married doesn’t insult you? We’ll be insulted on your behalf then.
i’ve obviously had a different upbringing to you. To be completely honest, i haven’t looked any further into Phyllis Schlafley’s article other than what you’ve quoted in the above article, but most of the quoted section, i wholeheartedly agree with. It’s not, as you suggest, saying that all men are only good, faithful, and protective IF they’re married, but it’s saying that there are men that are only good, faithful and protective IF they’re married, and this i agree with 100%. Guess what though, there are also women that are only good, faithful and protective IF they’re married. i also… Read more »
Her article wasn’t about relationships. It was about reducing rape and abuse. And her take is that the solution is for women to take their focus off of their careers and get married. And any upbringing (I was raised in a Christian cult, you?) that teaches that men are abusive by nature, but being married is the solution, is dangerous. We’re not talking about “settling” into not going out and partying so much. We’re talking about not abusing women.
quite clearly she isn’t saying that all men are abusive by nature, and even if she was trying to assert that, you and I both know that’s not correct.
I was brought up in a non-religious familiy in a secular community. We weren’t taught that anyone was bad, we were taught that people are nice, and want to do the right thing if given the opportunity. So far in my life, nothing has proved this to be incorrect
And men should just be quiet when their wives beat them, according to The Good Men Project.
Really? When did I even SUGGEST that?
And men should just be quiet when their wives beat them.
Dixie, I hope you know that I didn’t have an issue with your article or the content and I appreciate and commend your efforts to educate. That being said and after I read your brief bio where you have “broken through brick walls” …. perhaps you could shed some light on something that’s bugged me for a long time. Given the fact that abuse is cyclical and there are times where women repeatedly not only go back to the abuser but find other abusers, what’s it going to take for these women to break through that “brick wall?” As I… Read more »
No Tom, I didn’t. I hear your frustration, but it did come across as directed at the article and my position personally. You can’t know just how desperately I want to be an agent for men and women to break through the walls. And that includes those who abuse as well as those who are abused. I have only recently been willing to reference my personal experience. But for years my business clients have found themselves telling me about their personal history, and their pain. Men AND women. I spent the early years of my consulting career in medical management.… Read more »
“I feel like a very small voice.” I can definitely relate to this. I’ve been working in a residential treatment center for adolescent boys for many years. And as you know that although the information gathered in our head is anecdotal, after many years we compile that information as for lack of any other term, statistical. So we can see trends and common denominators. The frustration with me is that I “know” what I know because of years of experience. Now, without valid studies, much of what I say is shoved aside because I don’t have the “study” to back… Read more »
I love that story in it’s original. I’m bothered that so many people want to make the star-thrower into a child. As though only the innocence of a child would believe that making a difference to one is worthwhile. It’s far more meaningful to me that it was a grown man. It’s a dark story, but powerful the way it was written. Because it is when we are wise enough to know we cannot do enough, but that what we can do must be enough, that the story reaches the fullness of its potential. The dependence on “evidence” is a… Read more »
Maybe the question should be, “Is marriage really necessary?” We have been told all our lives that this is supposed to be the goal for men and women. People get married for all the wrong reasons like family pressure, tradition, fear of being alone, etc. Robin Williams was supporting a family and two ex-wives when he committed suicide due to depression and financial problems. Just because you can get married does not necessarily mean you should.
It’s a valid question Wes. Marriage for the sake of marriage (I think) is not only not necessary, but is one of the worst forms of deception. But for some marriage IS necessary. They need that public sharing and validation that the rites of marriage bring. Which is why I believe marriage should be accessible for all people. If they believe it strengthens their bond then it will. And that may not be necessary, but to me it seems good.
I have no problem with same sex marriage, but would remind them of the old saying “Be careful what you wish for”. Because gay or straight, if it goes sideways, someone will be on the losing end. Especially if kids are involved.
Yes, goes for all relationships. Legally binding or not.
Quotes from Dixie’s article: “Her conclusion ignores the fact that many marriages end in divorce because of an abusive partner (and isn’t always the man.) It ignore the fact that men aren’t safe either — women are not the only abuse survivors and men are not the only abuse perpetrators. And finally, it ignores the fact that women should not fear all men, because men are just people. Like any other generalization, there are people whom you have cause to fear, and people you don’t have cause to fear. And it’s darned hard to tell the difference, but making that… Read more »
Thank you John. I know a lot of people think her message is so outrageous it isn’t even worth speaking to. BUT the underlying message is even more damaging to men than her implication that men are not to be trusted unless you marry them. You nailed it better than I did – but that “American Dream” that a good woman can turn a bad man around and live happily ever after is a HORRIBLE thing for men because who wants to be a girl’s “project?” There is enough of that mentality around already. I missed obvious there. Thanks for… Read more »
really, i took a completely different message from the article.
To me, it says women should be trying to find a mate worthy of marriage, not just “hooking up” with random men.
Dear me – you think I said that? Whoa! Please tell me what I said that gave you that impression. Or did you read the quote from P.S. and think that I agreed with it? Because yeah, that’s one of the things she implies.
no, i don’t think you believe that at all.
To be honest, i’m not really sure what point you’re trying to make, other than to disagree with Phyllis Schlafly.
I believe the point of her article is women should be trying to find a mate worthy of marriage, not just “hooking up” with random men.
Ah – as to the point I’m trying to make, it’s this: The corollary of her argument is the old dime store romance. Formula plot goes something like this – good, sweet girl meets bad boy. Bad boy misbehaves through most of the “story” but good girl discovers that he is really angst driven, or misled, or whatever. She “saves” him and they live happily ever after. Her implication that men settle down when married implies that if you can just get him to the altar you’ll turn that bad boy into a white knight because NOW he’ll protect you… Read more »
To the people criticizing Gillaspie for writing about male-on-female violence, what do you expect to gain? It’s a lot easier to criticize the work of others than it is to produce one’s own work. But try. To use a hopefully neutral example: If I noticed that there was a lot more information available about dogs as pets than about tegus, leaving displeased comments below articles about dogs isn’t going to add to our knowledge of how best to care for tegus. It goes without saying that abuse is much more serious and emotional of a topic than dogs versus tegus,… Read more »
Thank you Andre – but here’s the thing. I’m not writing about male-on-female violence so much as I’m trying to address what is being SAID by someone else about male-on-female violence. Maybe I’m not hitting the mark, or maybe people are so sure they know what I’m saying that they don’t really read what I’m saying. BUT what we’re being served up in P.S.’s statement IS that men are bad unless you marry them, then they’re your knight in shining armor. Which ticks me off, because men are men, they’re people. Some of them are abusers, just like some women… Read more »
Andre,I understand what you’re saying but as a writer, he/she has an opportunity to research. No, there isn’t nearly the information about female on male violence but that doesn’t mean it’s not available. Just harder to find and evaluate.
I do like your animal comparison because it fits perfectly with what I’m saying. But as you know, the information Is there but it takes more to find it.
And I would like to add …. Why isn’t it available. How long are we going to let things go and ignore that which is clearly a problem. Why, because society doesn’t view men the same way. GMP does a good job showing positive attributes men have, many stories, great stories, of good men. But as time goes by, men continue to be incarcerated, murdered …. simply disposed of.
Feminism wanted women and men to be equal on all levels …. so why isn’t information on female to male violence readily available?
We all have the opportunity to research. And I have. Although it was not the point of this piece, I’ve done a lot of reading on the psychology of why men don’t talk about their experiences, I’ve talked with men who have experienced abuse, sexual and otherwise. You don’t know me, so you don’t know just how much I am NOT ignoring it. Just because I’m writing to something else here doesn’t mean I am not also concerned and active about anything else. I have seen the statistics. In the post I did about one survivor’s story I addressed the… Read more »
“Frankly I don’t get into statistics in my pieces BECAUSE I believe they are grossly misrepresenting the problem”
And yet you believe in Rape culture and defending feminist statistics surrounding college sexual assault – https://goodmenproject.com/ethics-values/thank-letter-mr-will-dg/
Ouch
Where in that article did I “defend statistics?” That article was about ending the silence. About right to consent. And about what rape really IS about which is NOT sex. Yes I believe we live in a rape culture. And the myth that “men can’t be raped because they always want it” is just as indicative of that culture as the myth that “no really means yes.” Try reading what I wrote, not what your agenda believes about what I wrote.
as soon as i saw the author of this article was female, i knew exactly which direction it was going to go in.
She also doesn’t discuss any potential difference in the rate of reporting of domestic violence in married relationships vs “live-in” relationships. I’d be interested to see those statistics and am reasonably confident there would be a significant difference for a number of reasons, not the least of which are attitudes about “honouring the commitment” that come from marriage – “in good times and in bad” etc.
That was something that came up during our writer’s discussion as well. But it’s hard to have stats about how many people won’t report to the people collecting data for stats.
Even if women did what she said and even if it worked, you can’t force someone into marrying you. Would she suggest “trapping” a man? Somehow I don’t think a man forced / coerced into marriage is going to be more likely to “settle down”.
I don’t know John, but that opens a valid can of worms. I think that is one of the scary implications behind this fairytale thinking – “if I can just get him to the alter he’ll settle down.” The stuff of dime store romances. And that isn’t even about abuse, it’s any behavior the woman wants to change. Its turns my stomach, but it’s common.
Yup, we got it … men weather married or not are dangerous. From another article I read “According to this information, what someone should do is write an op-ed about how banning men would nip domestic violence in the bud. That would solve everything.
Maybe you could spend time on female on male violence? You know, like some else did on GMP. Great stats, great information and totally non-biased.
Hi, Tom. That wasn’t my takeaway at all. I read it that marrying a man is not going to make him not abusive, if he’s going to be abusive, and that marriage it not necessary to a happy, healthy relationship.
I think what’s dangerous in Schlafly’s line of thinking is that it perpetuates the ideas that, “It will be better if we get married,” when a relationship is unhealthy to begin with, and that marriage is somehow a cure for an abusive partner/relationship.
Actually PART of what is so dangerous about her line of thinking is that “men will be men until you marry them” rhetoric. BS. Men are people, some people – of ANY gender, race, religion, etc… are abusive. Being in a loving, committed relationship DOES help some of them because the abuse came from their own pain of feeling unworthy, unloved, etc.. That she makes this strictly about gender roles is repulsive and another case of false premise = incorrect conclusion. But I could not get everything I wanted to say, or everything that was shared in the FB group,… Read more »
So Tom, I’m confused. You’re calling me out on what you read on another article? Because I certainly did NOT state or imply that men are dangerous, only that IF a person is dangerous being married does not necessarily make them less so. Or you missed the several places where I clearly stated that men aren’t always the abusers, that gender-based generalizations are the worst kind of “incorrect conclusions,” and that “men aren’t safe either — women are not the only abuse survivors and men are not the only abuse perpetrators?” Or maybe you think I should be writing about… Read more »
I’m not calling you out based upon another article. I’m just tired that no matter which way a guy turns, even on a so called “men’s” site, we are continually bombarded with someone telling us how bad we are. And I’m still waiting for the stats that address the % of men who commit these acts. 1 in 5 women is not the same as i in 5 men committing these act. I would venture to say that it’s way different. And to answer your question … “Or maybe you think I should be writing about female on male violence… Read more »
Well Tom, sorry to disappoint. And you are welcome to voice your opinion or to stop reading my work. But all of us write on what we feel called to speak to. And the fact that other people are also speaking to it doesn’t silence me or make me feel my thoughts are immaterial in any way. As to your statistics – I do not see how they are relevant to our dialog since in no way did I allege that 1 in 5 women are abused, let alone that 1 in 5 men are abusers. I frankly have little… Read more »
So I guess there is a lot of work to do to get men to step forward. IMO, time well spent trying to do so. Why do we have to wait to talk more honestly? In so far as the 1 in 5, it’s a stat that has been thrown around for a long time. My point is that MOST men do not abuse and I’m really tired of a society that continues to paint a picture that they do. Even married guys, single guys, old guys you guys. Reality is that there is enough information to start addressing women… Read more »
You can stop with the false crusaderact right now. In no way did Ms. Gillaspie’s article call all men violent abusers. She pointed out in no uncertain terms : ” women are not the only abuse survivors and men are not the only abuse perpetrators”. You are not trying to foster a rational debate, you are pushing a toxic, irrational personal agenda. I have observed this tactic over and over and over in your responses to any article referencing violence and abuse of women and girls. What exactly do you think you are going to accomplish by attempting to derail… Read more »
My comments were not as much directed to her article content as they were to GMP in general. The general undertone of “men are bad” with little effort to address as important an issue as female on male abuse. The continual (week after week) pointing at men and how bad they are and how women have to be aware. In so far as Shafley and what she said, when you take into consideration the stats with respect to marriage and divorce, I would suspect that there would be a correlation. The divorce stats as they’ve been presented are off for… Read more »