A guest post today for International Women’s Day, from Lily Greenan from Scottish Women’s Aid. We are most grateful, also because the Better Nation editorial team has a marked gender imbalance.
Last week’s Old Firm game raised a few questions for me. The aggression used by some players during the game was more than matched afterwards by their managers/assistant manager. Was I shocked? I wish I could say yes, but sadly, I wasn’t shocked. There was nothing new here. Displays of macho posturing are not unique to football and though I agree that Lennon and McCoist should be more mindful of the influence they have and the messages they give out, I would say the same of many men in positions of power and influence in Scotland.
There has been a fair bit of coverage of the link between the Old Firm game and a reported rise in domestic abuse incidents. This isn’t news to anyone working in the field; nor is it news to the women, children and young people who live with it. Around Scotland, reported incidents increase after local football matches. I don’t know whether there is a bigger problem in relation to Old Firm games or not.
What I do know is that football doesn’t cause domestic abuse, any more than alcohol does. Women who experience domestic abuse talk about being controlled by their partner, isolated from family and friends, made to feel worthless. The violence their partner uses has a purpose – it reinforces the control he has over them. It happens every day, not just match day.
Men who abuse their partners don’t act in a vacuum. Their behaviour may be supported or challenged by what is happening in the community around them, by the effectiveness of the justice system and by the political priorities of the State. In Scotland, an incredible amount of work has been done since devolution to tackle domestic abuse. Cross party support has ensured a consistent message from Holyrood that domestic abuse is a political priority. This has been reflected in improved justice system responses, increased service provision and some world class work to address the needs of children and young people who experience domestic abuse.
What is missing is real engagement with the wider public. In particular, what is missing is the voices of men. What is missing is a much needed conversation about what it means to be a man in Scotland today and why it is so intrinsically linked to violence and aggression. As Gerry Hassan said in his thought-provoking exploration of some of the issues – “why do we seem to be uncomfortable and unwilling to begin a debate about men behaving badly?â€.
It’s a question that begs a conversation. It’s a conversation that shouldn’t – and perhaps can’t – be started by women.
Today is the 100th anniversary of International Women’s Day, a day which celebrates the struggles and achievements of women around the world. Today Alex Salmond will host a Summit bringing together the SFA and the Old Firm teams to “chart a way forwardâ€. I wish them well and offer this suggestion – start the conversation about why men behave badly – not just at football matches, but in the streets and in their homes.
We won’t stop domestic abuse until you do.
#1 by James on March 8, 2011 - 5:27 pm
This has become bizarrely over-simplified in the media:
Watch match. Hit woman.
Or, if you’re lucky, the analysis stretches to:
Drink. Watch match. Hit woman.
There’s an awful lot of domestic abuse nowhere near football matches, and looking for ways to tackle that (somehow, God knows how, ideas welcome) would allow people to stop making this all about the Old Firm.
#2 by Indy on March 8, 2011 - 5:40 pm
I agree with James. This seems to be becoming a habit lol!
The meeting today was requested by the police and was specifically about tackling disorder around Old Firm games. Somehow that seems to have been conflated with the whole issue of drink-related violence in the streets and domestic violence.
I think some of the action points that have been agreed today seem useful but it is just one aspect of a much bigger problem and people shouldn’t overstate its importance.
#3 by Jeff on March 8, 2011 - 5:55 pm
Now, as I am so out of the loop with this issue, I couldn’t really think of anything noteworthy to say in a comment earlier this morning but I think a problem, quite different to domestic abuse but not entirely separate, is that many men do not know their place in society, they perhaps even feel a sense of shame borne out of their sex.
I’m not necessarily saying that’s the case with all men but I think it’s more common than some may think; I’ll admit my ‘what’s this life all about anyway’ moments is pretty heavily interspersed with rather negative ‘what does it mean to be a guy’ conclusions.
Whether it is through the numerous hapless Dads in the movies/tv adverts or the newspapers constantly reminding us that ‘our’ sex is responsible for most crimes out there or an overpaid footballer cheating/acting stupidly or being told that males do 33% of the world’s work but rake in 90% of the world’s income, we don’t seem to know our place any more and/or find a way to feel satisfied with ourselves. From the little I’ve read about the subject it seems to be a helplessness and meaninglessness that is on the surge and, without assigning blame, is directly proportional to a female empowerment. Could there be a link between this male emptiness and male-dominated domestic abuse?
It’s a growing problem, and a serious one at that. So for every International Woman’s Day that perhaps exacerbates the problem I do wonder if there should be an International Man’s Day in order to ensure a balance. While I would never attack a feminist for pointing out the many genuine grievances that they have; I do try to warn them of the flip side of the current direction of travel.
Women have many great role models out there but where are the male role models? Colin Firth seems a decent bloke but is that it? Should males adopt females as role models? To an extent probably yes but it doesn’t seem to fully address the very simple question of just what specifically a man’s role is in a 21st century world.
Anyway, that’s my thoughts on International Woman’s Day. Pretty selfish hey?’
#4 by James on March 8, 2011 - 6:21 pm
As Charlie Brown’s grandma said, “every day is children’s day”.
#5 by Douglas McLellan on March 8, 2011 - 6:22 pm
No selfish but an interesting point.
Feminism has won. It fought a battle that was a fight to be like men. And lo, when then got it, they still weren’t happy. They fought the wrong battle.
Yes, on average, men earn more than women. But, and here is the point about pay, there are still millions of men who earn fractions of the salary the highest paid men in the country. Yes, more men are in positions of power (say the Cabinet), but again millions of men are not in positions of power, are as powerless as women and have no way to achieve the power that feminists say they have.
Thing is, no movement seeks to specifically raise the pay of poorly paid men. No columnist calls into question why the many men who are not in power are not actually in power.
Some men who are not well paid or do not have power in fact have voices for them. BME groups advocate that there should be more black men (and women) in parliament and should earn more. LGBT groups seek to ensure that employment laws protect LGBT employees. Women’s groups advocate that women should be able to earn the same as men regardless of skills, experiences or personal negotiating skills. In fact, on average, women earn more than men up to the age of 30 but then childbirth disrupts that. But still the argument goes that when coming back to work, the pay should have risen anyway.
Who speaks for the average white male? The average white male that doesn’t earn a lot or have a position of power.
Lots of these white men will feel alone as no-one is offering them support. This can lead to the totally wrong and disastrous idea of seeking the power and control that Lily Greenan mentions via a violent relationship with the partner at home.
The complete role and position of men in society needs to be examined so that we can then work out why men are violent and violent to their partners and children. And that is a conversation is even less likely to happen than than Gerry Hassans question “why do we seem to be uncomfortable and unwilling to begin a debate about men behaving badly?â€.
The correct battle for feminists would have been for a better society for all. Which is the one we need to think about now.
#6 by Lily on March 8, 2011 - 9:30 pm
It was never about ‘winning’ for me Douglas. All I wanted to do in 1981, when I started in this work, was help women who had been raped. 30 years later, we have come a long way, but there is still a very long way to go.
I agree that there are millions of ‘average white men’ who earn a pittance, who don’t have structural power or influence. But that in itself doesn’t explain why some of those men abuse the women in their lives but the majority don’t. Nor does it explain the powerful men – the doctors and lawyers, politicians and bankers – who DO abuse the women in their lives.
#7 by Douglas McLellan on March 9, 2011 - 2:27 am
That lack of explanation is the point. There will be many factors that lead to men be abusive and they all need to be looked at. Men should not be rapists but some men are – why? The Brownmiller answer is that it is about power and control but Thornhill/Palmer argue that there is a much greater biological reason. Related will be the issue about rape and domestic violence by men on their partners compared with stranger rape.
I would probably argue that there are no easily identifiable reasons why some men act the way they do. For some men it will be upbringing, others it will be the situation they are in changing who they are, for others it will be a base response to whatever characteristics that natural selection has bequeathed them.
#8 by Lily on March 8, 2011 - 9:07 pm
Not selfish at all Jeff – exactly the kind of response I hoped for. I think there IS an issue about how men respond to and engage with the social change we have gone through over the last 40 years. I don’t think individual struggles with ‘what it means to be a man’ excuse violence or abuse, but accept that those changes have had an impact on men, collectively and individually, that is (in Scotland) mostly not talked about.
I hope the conversations do get rolling – I am serious when I say we will see no end to domestic abuse until men start talking to and challenging each other.
But you don’t get an International Men’s Day till you’ve done more work for it! (feminist joke)
#9 by theshooglypeg on March 8, 2011 - 6:04 pm
This is a helpful viewpoint. Domestic abuse is not a “women’s issue”. It’s about power and control, gained through verbal abuse and violence. So it’s a lot more constructive to focus on why a minority of men behave in this way and what can be done to stop them than to think it’s all about shelters for abused women.
#10 by Una on March 8, 2011 - 6:22 pm
Hmmm. You seem to be suggesting, Jeff, that as women are empowered men somehow lose their identity. I don’t really follow your logic. Equality and respect is surely easy to understand and not a threat but a good thing.
Around the world women suffer the most horrific violence and abuse in places where they are most certainly not empowered in any way.
I think it’s a rigidity of stereotypical roles that is a greater threat to both men and women who don’t want to fit them – and that is worsening in my view.
#11 by Jeff on March 8, 2011 - 8:45 pm
Thanks Una. I don’t have a problem with equality and respect of course. I also don’t subscribe to the widely held notion that women have achieved their goals, I’m happy to stand aside as the feminist fight continues and, as much as I can be, am a feminist into the bargain.
But I guess I am saying that men are losig their identity as women are winning their empowerment, I’m not necessarily saying that that is a causal link but if IWD is going to be partly defined by domestic abuse and a conversation on the issue requested, as per this fine guest post, my small contribution to that discussion would be to say that men’s poorly defined role within society and the family is, I think, a root cause of the problems currently beguiling men and women. And I’d go out on a limb and even suggest that domestic abuse is included in that set of problems.
#12 by Indy on March 9, 2011 - 10:53 am
I think what you are saying is that both male and female identities are changing.
That has something to do with feminism but in my opinion more to do with the economy and changing employment patterns – the shutting down of traditional employers like shipyards, factories, steel mills, mines etc. A whole working class way of life has been destroyed and people have struggled to replace it. Men have been the bigger victims because women can go on doing the work that they have always done in the service industries but it is harder for men who are the product of a culture which was built around skilled manual labour to rebuild a new identity when that work has gone.
#13 by Observer on March 8, 2011 - 8:12 pm
Domestic violence does not just affect women. Not all men are capable of being aggressors, & not all women are potential victims of domestic violence.
It’s an immensely complicated subject, & I am afraid that Women’s Aid tend to simplify it along gender lines.
For example – what about domestic violence between same sex couples? Where do the gender lines fit in there.
I am very uncomfortable about the way this issue has developed. What I want to see are practical measures to see the violence – usually drink related – associated with old firm matches reduced.
I think introducing wider issues is not particularly helpful in doing that.
#14 by Lily on March 8, 2011 - 9:35 pm
There’s a paper on Same Sex domestic Abuse on the Scottish Women’s Aid website. I tried to insert the link in this comment but I can’t, so if you’re interested, try http://www.scottishwomensaid.org.uk and you will find it in Publications.
#15 by Douglas McLellan on March 9, 2011 - 2:30 am
There is also the issue of female on male domestic violence and how that is the dealt with by both the police and victim support organisations.
Or not as the case is. In Midlothian anyway.
#16 by NoOffenceAlan on March 9, 2011 - 8:53 am
Very good post.
I think something like 90% of all crime is committed by men.
So if men could start behaving as well as women do, then crime could be reduced by 80%.
But a sound-bite like “more bobbies on the beat” is easier for the media and the politicians, so the gender angle is never investigated.
A couple of thoughts:
is bad behaviour tolerated more in boys than girls from a young age?
is the fact that nurseries and primary schools are largely men-free zones good or bad?
#17 by Indy on March 9, 2011 - 10:42 am
I have to say I find some of these comments remarkable.
Feminism has won has it?
This in a week when a councillor was sacked for suggesting that a nine year old child might have cooperated in her own rape and days after another politician had to resign after suggesting that a victim of gang rape may have been a prostitute and therefore less of a victim. And in the context of discussing the wider issue of domestic abuse and drink-fuelled violence which is overwhelmingly perpetrated by men. Wow.
Here’s a suggestion – let’s all meet down the Gallowgate or Paisley Road West the next time there is an old firm game on and celebrate the victory of feminism lol.
As regards sound-bites and “bobbies on the beat”. I take the point that crime policy is often simplified and that it is more complex than is taken into account by the media but sometimes bobbies on the beat are the only thing between us and them and you’d better hope there are enough bobbies to protect you.
#18 by James on March 9, 2011 - 10:52 am
I agree with Indy.
#19 by Douglas McLellan on March 9, 2011 - 1:18 pm
You both miss my point. Willfully I feel.
The fact that the Cllr was sacked & MSP stood down from a committee shows that society is now a decent and civilised place the sees those comments as beneath contempt, I would argue, shows that there has been a correct victory for feminism.
The fact that all sections of society sees the problem of male on female domestic violence as something that needs to be addressed urgently is, again, a victory.
Of course, if you define a victory as total eradication of something then yes, there is some distance to go. But I would argue that total eradication is nigh on impossible when dealing with human beings.
Pingback: Four Seasons in one Roundup – Scottish Roundup