22 December, 2006

ms_xeno’s Last Post?

Posted in Abbott and Costello, Alas a Blog, Feminist Issues, Flame Wars, ms_xeno, Survivors and Survival at 2:38 pm by Daran

ms_xeno:

This will be my final post on Alas. While I wouldn’t go so far as to say that Daran’s behavior is unique on this board, it is pretty sadly representative of all the things on this board that have come to completely outweigh any good it still does my soul.

I’m sorry if you feel you need to leave on my account. It is ironic that the one time I feel you are talking to me rather than at me, you’re probably not going to read my reply.

Daran, on your very own link above, you make some ridiculous claims about what I said regarding the funding of men’s shelters.

You are mistaken. Nowhere on that link is there a reference to shelters. I talked in the general of inclusion within the discourse and access in to resources. Your own comment, quoted in that post, was a derisive response to me, and I responded in kind. I’m sorry if you feel I was being unfair, but you haven’t been fair to me. What I have written about you, albeit expressed in derisive tones, has always been what I have understood from what you have written. When I see I am wrong, I have always been willing to retract and apologise, so it has always been open to you to clarify your position with me.

In your own quote, you make it clear that the funders of the women’s shelter in question felt that they were already serving the community adequately by funding the women’s shelter.

The Women’s Aid Centre did (and does) operate shelters, but the funding for that was separate (indeed from a different funder) from the funding that we were competing for. (So it turned out. We didn’t know that we were in competition with them at the time we applied for it.) You are correct, however, that the funder “felt that they were already serving the community adequately by funding the women’s [service]”. In reality, they were only serving part of the community, (and even that part, I agree, inadequately). The point of the anecdote was not to blame the WAC for getting ‘our’ money, but to illustrate how the general exclusion of male victims from the discourse renders them invisible and results in their being denied resources.

In your customary zeal to mock feminism, play fatuous word games, and continue your idiotic use of words like “apartheid,” not once do I see any of the following acknowledgements:

The intention is not to mock feminism, but to identify and describe a structural problem. The analogy with apartheid is sound. With apartheid, a section of the population was excluded from power structures and resources on the basis of skin colour. With gender, it’s more complex than that, because some men are powerful and wealthy. Feminism’s conceptual error is to conflate powerful men with powerless men. It’s like refusing to help male beggars in Redmond (home of Microsoft, hence of three of the five richest men in the world) on the grounds that men already have 99% of the city’s wealth.

Perhaps it might take some time and repeated effort to overcome stereotypes about abused men, much as feminists have had to do when putting together shelters. It doesn’t serve the men you are trying to help at all for you to throw up your hands as if the Mighty Feminist Conspiracy will now and forever render your attempts impossible.

I have not said that. Those most likely to “render [my] attempts impossible” are the idiot MRAs that you and other people here confuse me with. I suggest also it is feminists who have the conspiracy theory.

Women’s shelters are by and large not equipped at present to care for all the women that need help and perhaps this might be a factor in their not wanting to take on the complications of housing male survivors. Which begs the question, again, of your insistence on an oppositional relationship. Abusive households tend to produce more abusive households, and it seems to me that if you were sincere in your desire to stop DV, you would applaud what feminists have done instead of constantly running them down.

I agree that services for DV victims are underresourced, and that abusive households tend to produce more abusive households. (I was a victim of that pattern. My exGF had suffered violence from her father, and was violent to me in turn.) I do not agree that these should be a reasons to discriminate against victims on the grounds of sex.

The way that funding is allocated ought to be looked at in terms of the discrepancy between social funding and other categories of funding, as opposed to your continual technique of looking only at the discrepancy between funding for women’s shelters and funding for men’s shelters. Again, do you have any interest at all in doing this ? Doesn’t seem like it to me. You have yourself a handy excuse to never accomplish anything and you just can’t seem to let it go.

I have not been active specifically in the field of domestic violence, though my work in other fields often touched upon it. For example, I was a child befriender. When the boy I befriended went with his family into shelter for several months because of violence (against his mother, not against him) by his father, it was important that my contact with him continued through those difficult times, and the WAC was very helpful in that regard. Although the purpose of child befriending is to serve the needs of the child, there are incidental benefits to parents too, mostly the primary care-giver, which is usually (and in my case was) the mother.

And that’s just one example. In the spirit of “not [worrying] about which side is bigger, but [grabbing] a shovel and start[ting to] tackl[e] whatever part of the mountain is within [] reach“, the work I have done has benefited far more women than men. I do worry, however, about the structural problems that render needy men inaccessible to help.

So I think your suggestion that I am an armchair critic is unfounded.

In respect of the “discrepancy between social funding and other categories of funding”, I agree that this needs to be looked at too.

Now you can hurry back to your own site and make up some more shit about me, with no sense of irony at all over the fact that a week or so ago, you were crying for poor old jaketik who was not here to defend himself from my comments about how he is/was wont to behave around feminists. Hell, you can photoshop pictures of my head to Godzilla’s body and drive virtual tanks over it for all I care.

I have no desire to do that. As for “mak[ing] up shit about you”, I have not done that. I have, I have already acknowledged, been “witheringly insulting” toward you, (the link is to where I acknowledge this, not to where I insult you), but only in response to your attacks upon me, and always based upon what you said and did. Nevertheless, if I have made any errors, you have only to point them out and I will correct them. I should also like to remind you of two specific errors you made (one, two), for which your own corrections are overdue.

As for jaketk, I have always found him to be pleasant, courteous, honest, and straight-forward. I realise that it will probably annoy people that I say this, but I don’t agree that this is a reason not to say it.

Anyone else who wants to speak with me can certainly find my contact info easily enough. If you’re in Daran’s posse, don’t bother. Your posts or emails will be thrown out unanswered.

I wouldn’t dream of emailing you, and I’m not aware that I have a ‘posse’.

Posted as a comment to Alas (in moderation), and also on my blog.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: