Re: RE: A Train of Lies

Home Forums Critique Central Nonfiction A Train of Lies Re: RE: A Train of Lies



Great points as ususal, Peg.

I understand the numbers are confusing. To clarify, the 38% is the percentage of injuries to that require some sort of medical attention in which men are the victim. Half is the percentage of just incidents of violence that would qualify as an assault without any real injury. Therefore, half the violence is committed by women, which makes them half the perpetrators, while a much smaller proportion of that number results in significant injury.

The 38% significant injury rate also includes men who are assaulted by same sex partners, and I have not been able to locate credible research that gives me the number of just women that cause significant injury to men.

But since we usually go with the axiom that any violence is wrong, not just violence that requires medical attention, the half and half rate seems to apply across the board to men and women.

Did I make that all as clear as mud? I hope I clarified a little anyway.

You are not close about the frustration or sense of futility. You are spot on the money about it. Another way to put it is that on a personal level, I really do tire of the myth-busting theme that I feel like I have to go through to make my points. I know those points annoy, even offend some readers, and that is not the path of choice for me, but a necessary evil. (See, I do cliches too)

I also tire of feeling compelled to somehow qualify in each and every piece that I am not attacking women, but rather going after what I see as gender neurosis of the times. It plagues my writing in almost every piece. Maybe that is where the sarcasm comes from. But I agree with you that it is not helpful.

Thanks again.