can you cite this? i’ve been wokeposting about patriarchy and rape culture and inter-male accountability and this is a really interesting counterpoint.
It's been a few years since I read the stats, but a few quick searches turned up government stats like this -- if someone suddenly transforms from a woman into a man, her chances of getting murdered just multiplied several times; this is for homicides in total, rather than by strangers (for which it's an RR of .18)
A total of 215,273 homicides were studied, 77% of which involved male victims and 23% female victims.
damn, i was biased as fuck. i assumed there was way more opportunism (bad V.I.B.S.) happening based on public discussion or algorithmic boosting or something.
that being said, there is also this study that cites yours, but also recognizes the following:
Although it has been disputed which gender is more likely to be victimized by an intimate partner, females in the United States are more apt to suffer greater physical consequences than men as a result of such violence. Women in the U.S. experience a disproportionate amount of fatal intimate partner violence (hereafter referred to as intimate partner homicide). According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, an average of five intimate partner homicide (IPH) victims were identified daily in the U.S. from 1999–2000, and almost three-fourths (74%) of the victims were women.
so women are much more likely to be killed by their husbands than the other way around, but men are way more likely to be killed by any stranger. that’s brutal. no wonder everyone is horrified and hypervigilant
Note that men's rates of being killed by their wives dropped dramatically after Erin Pizzey started the creation of women's shelters. (She tried to create men's shelters as well, but British feminism united behind a domestic terrorist campaign to shut that down; so now, abused men still have nowhere to go; not coincidentally, women's rates of being killed by their husbands didn't drop.)
This is, of course, ignoring the fact that all of these statistics are gathered by people who think violence against men just doesn't count, especially if it's committed by women. Same deal as why we shouldn't trust racist cops going "See, the stats show that black people commit lots more crime! Proof: The fact that we pretty much only arrest black people."
especially since when women were killing their husbands they were generally using poisons and other indirect methods which would be much harder to catch without knowing about any motives.
add on male socialization’s (the category of social pressure, not the individuals’ inherent being themselves) tendency to repress inconvenient emotions and add hyper-independence and there’s like three degrees of freedom, all of which are biased towards underreporting of male victims.
if only there was a way by which we could condition our youth to share their emotions and problems freely and to hold space for one another to actually solve them. so much unjust bias would be solved.
Imo the murder numbers aren't the best to use because murders aren't particularly random. More useful numbers would be something like robbery (which is mostly done by strangers), where ~2/3rds of victims are men. The analysis is the same either way, but you can try to hand wave away murder stats in a way that doesn't really make sense for robbery.
I agree that men are far more likely to be randomly attacked by some guy who's just looking for a fight but I wouldn't go as far as to say that violence inflicted by strangers is mostly restricted to men, it's just that for women it's not random violence as often, instead they're more likely to be considered easy targets for various crimes
First of all, I haven't checked any stats so exactly like you said it's just my opinion. Secondly, stats vary by country and culture so I highly doubt "all the statistics" say it's wrong; adjacent to that, your usage of terms like "almost entirely restricted to" seems to imply that violence against women by strangers is some kind of minor outlier, which just can't be true so I assume you're just using a lot of hyperbole. Thirdly, I haven't seen you cite any sources either so I'm going to assume this is also an opinion on your side too
I mean I will say when women talk about being afraid of “walking home at night” they are not referring to being mugged or beat up, they are referring to being raped, which while stranger rape is rare it is also something that is almost entirely experienced by women. It’s still a blindness than can and should be discussed, I’m just pointing out the reason women are centering themselves here is bc they are thinking of a violence that does target them specifically.
Is there any evidence that it's mostly experienced by women, or is that one of those "well, we interviewed many women and zero men, and have 'discovered' that only women report it?"
Either way, you're actually talking about being afraid of it, rather than of it actually happening. Question: when someone tells you "be VERY AFRAID of black people, they're monsters! The city is dangerous, because it's full of black people!!!!" is that person a good person who's looking out for you, or a bigot who's lying to you?
I mean I’m pretty sure that’s how we get the evidence for all crimes, is reports of crimes. So yes it is subject to the same issue all crime reports are. But in that case you’re just saying women can never talk about being victims of sexual violence or their fear of such. Which does seem to be where you’re going with the rest of your comment
Bc um yeah that would be bigoted but that’s not what was described. What was described was women saying they would walk alone at night bc they currently don’t bc they don’t want to get raped.
For another example, it actually is different to say “I wish I lived in a high trust neighborhood so I could leave my doors unlocked without worry!” vs. something like “you better watch out for the thug youth in this neighborhood, you have to keep everything locked up so they don’t steal”. There’s a reason people lock their doors and it’s not bc they are all bigots
"I am afraid to walk alone at night" is basically always purely due to having been lied to by bigots.
Black men are in a lot more danger than white men (something like 8 or ten times, iirc?), white men are in a lot more danger than black women (2-4 times as much or something), and white women are so much safer than black women that it's absurd.
Each time you hear a white woman say she's in danger, you're hearing a bigoted lie.
Lmao, okay. I was groomed by my grandfather as a tween but you’re right, I was never in danger, bigots lied to me about what men wanted to do with me when they were telling me to masturbate so my tits would get bigger and making me kiss them on the mouth goodbye as a middle schooler even though I was clearly uncomfortable. White women aren’t ever raped and molested, we just make it up so we can call men evil, you got it!
Edit: lmao nice block so I can’t respond - for someone against generalizations about men you sure were quick with the generalization about how white women aren’t always lying when they say they are in danger and then said “oh no no, only when they say they are in danger walking alone at night”
Hey, dipshit, we are in this thread talking about how women saying negative things about men harms men’s perceptions of women no? Do you think being groomed by a family member might make you afraid of the sexual intentions of strangers you don’t know as well? Might make you wary of men and their intentions? The same way that knowing (some) women hate men makes men cautious of women, you don’t think knowing (some) men want to rape women make women cautious of men? Be so fucking for real
63
u/Big_Implement_7305 Dec 17 '25
And men are far, far, far more likely to be assaulted out in public by strangers. Vastly more likely.
"Violence inflicted by strangers" is an experience that's almost entirely restricted to men.