We’re As Sick As Our Secrets: Rapes, Shootings & ‘Real Men.’ ~ Tanya Marie

Via elephant journal
on Jan 29, 2013
get elephant's newsletter

Source: imgfave.com via Rachel on Pinterest


We need a paradigm shift: Real Men Don’t Harm.

The New Delhi gang rape and murder seemed to give a lot of Americans an opportunity to practice denial, national elitism, and perhaps even a little racism all at once.

By focusing on how in need of change Indian men/society are, we were able to allow our ‘boys to continue being boys’ and avoid the discomfort of owning our own epidemic of male violence. There was, after all, someone worse.

We’ve (U.S.) had numerous gang rapes with adolescents in the past few years, even on school grounds, sometimes with audiences of up to 40 or more peers watching/participating (for hours as girls were brutalized), students sharing video and texting their friends to participate.

Do you remember the big uproar about those? Probably not: there wasn’t any.

I was often frustrated, well before these two particular incidents occurred; earlier cases weren’t receiving much coverage and seemed to be glossed over by media. Steubenville certainly wasn’t the first time.

While American press was curiously in an uproar over two individual rapes, the Violence Against Women Act, created to help protect millions of American women against the plague of rape/violence, seamlessly and silently disappeared.

Indian-gang-rape-victim-takes-turn-worse-doctors-reveal-23-year-old-students-organs-failingThe crimes (but for the details) did not change, in either country, but the press coverage certainly did: “Why then?”

The India and Steubenville rapes also provided a distraction from the horrific shootings we were still reeling from. Committed by young, white affluent males, these crimes reflected entitlement: entitlement over other people’s bodies and entitlement over other people’s lives. (If being a ‘real man’ infers power and control, they certainly reclaimed theirs—at least temporarily.)

Yet, the over–riding social context, in which there is a desperate need to maintain authority and control, at all costs, is never mentioned.

While ‘masculinity/manhood’ (as in socialization, not as in natural condition of male born humans) has always been the one thing miraculously left out of the mainstream media maelstrom, this time, there was a hum.

Social media isn’t regulated to the degree that conventional ‘media’ has been; people are talking, revolutions are happening and paradigms shifting: threatening, threatening, threatening status quo. Even if mainstream media has a vested interested in sociological blind spots, social media has become a vehicle for outing the interests of the people, regardless.

Articles started to circulate in social media, putting words to those ‘things-that-must-not-be-named’ in conventional media. Rather than the mainstream media’s old, tired routine of, “Why is violence in America so out of control?’ some in social media actually dared to flat out state, “We weed to address the way we culture our men.”  <Gasp!>

In fact, some even had the audacity to suggest that we should use terminology, which squarely calls out the violator: “Men’s Violence Against Women”, rather than the violated, “Violence Against Women.”

While we all know men are the main perpetrators of crime: sexual, violent, white collar or otherwise, we’re hard pressed (v-e-r-y  u-n-c-o-m-f-o-r-t-a-b-le) to use the word ‘men’ as part of the equation. (Did your hair rise when I said, ‘young, affluent, white males’ above?)

Just articulating those demographic facts, is tantamount to male ‘bashing’—threatening  a fundamental belief system. Danger!

Even the proposal of analyzing the concept of ‘masculinity’ is challenging entitlement of male authority and runs strikingly close to questioning the entitlement of global dominance and institutionalized violence and discrimination: to be avoided at all costs. And let’s be clear, preserving this type of system through silence is creating great costs—for everyone. But, apparently, publicly naming the culprit and discussing ‘manhood/patriarchy’ is a greater threat.

Bottom line: These acts are not pathological, if they are born in a culture, which condones violence/dominance as the be-all-end-all of reclaiming masculinity.

By skirting around accountability and putting the focus on labeling the victims, mental health, guns or the crimes instead, we can guarantee unchallenged ‘manhood’ and expression of that in continued entitlement, violence and control. But do we really want to, at the expense of more outbreaks of ‘masculinity,’ paralyzing and terrorizing society/humanity as a whole?

If we really do want peace for our children, for our future, as we say, we need to get clean on the reality of the situation and own up: The current definitions/expressions of masculinity are killing us.

We need to look at all the ways these underlying belief structures advocate violence, dominance and control. Why should our boys be denied this anymore than anyone else? Let’s start to create a new dialogue, challenging concepts that limit men’s value to dominating and using violence as the final instrument of control and ‘manliness’.

Let’s start putting out the r-evolutionary idea that being a ‘real man’ doesn’t need to be contingent on power-over and control, or the potential threat thereof.

How about promoting messages like, “Real men don’t harm,” and in fact, they can be really amazing nurturers! Certainly, there could be many positive applications.

We need to make structural analysis of gender part of the open dialogue of dealing with violence; we’re only as sick as our secrets.

Onward human evolution!


tanya marieTanya Marie is a yoga teacher and former sociology teacher, focusing on awareness of both body and mind. Loves stimulating critical analysis and traveling the world. Creating an acceptance/understanding of all things ‘other’; while, highlighting interconnectedness, at the same time, is one of her passions. She has three lovely kitties; who she’s determined are little Buddhas to help her along The Path.

Like equal rights for all on Facebook

Asst. Ed: Edith Lazenby
Ed: Kate Bartolotta



About elephant journal

elephant journal is dedicated to "bringing together those working (and playing) to create enlightened society." We're about anything that helps us to live a good life that's also good for others, and our planet. >>> Founded as a print magazine in 2002, we went national in 2005 and then (because mainstream magazine distribution is wildly inefficient from an eco-responsible point of view) transitioned online in 2009. >>> elephant's been named to 30 top new media lists, and was voted #1 in the US on twitter's Shorty Awards for #green content...two years running. >>> Get involved: > Subscribe to our free Best of the Week e-newsletter. > Follow us on Twitter. Fan us on Facebook. > Write: send article or query. > Advertise. > Pay for what you read, help indie journalism survive and thrive—and get your name/business/fave non-profit on every page of elephantjournal.com. Questions? Send to [email protected]


7 Responses to “We’re As Sick As Our Secrets: Rapes, Shootings & ‘Real Men.’ ~ Tanya Marie”

  1. […] We’re As Sick As Our Secrets: Rapes, Shootings & ‘Real Men.’ […]

  2. Peaceful Warrior says:

    LOVE LOVE LOVE Tanya! Where do you teach SOC? I am a SOC major and so in love with the subject.

  3. bliss2go says:

    Thank you! NYS. 🙂

  4. Dana says:

    What a definitive, well-written, stance. Your point about including the “do-er”, the one who is acting by assaulting, is a profound. Were you aware of the studies by N Henley back in the 70s , I think? That describing violent crimes, rapes, without an “agent” (the male, who is doing the action) that people perceived the crime as without a perpetrator? That when it is only explained in passive voice, it is nearly as if the victim (she) is by herself (doing it to herself?) , and the rape is perceived by others as being less violent an act?

    I think we as women, culturally, protect our males in such a way, that we don’t want to name them as the perpetrators, as if there is some kind of female taboo against doing so.

    I do like to see, on Facebook, the photos of men holding signs that support anti-violence against women. I think that is an extreme rarity, however.

    I read this on Super Bowl Sunday, which means you probably are only “preaching to the choir”, on this day most of all. (Statistics of rape are higher on Super Bowl Sunday, or at least, they were when I was in college…) It’s the American maleness celebration day, and unfortunately that is deeply intertwined with an objectification of women (watch the commercials) and an intrinsic need for dominating power, somehow, too.)

  5. Superabound1 says:

    Lets not ignore the fact that the socialization of boys does not happen in a vacuum. Girls are socialized into regressive modes as well, and adult women are as complicit in the regressive socialization of children as adult men are.

    For every boy taught by men (and women) that in order to be a man he must "take what he wants", theres a girl being taught by her mother that a boy only abuses and insults her because he "secretly likes her".

  6. bliss2go says:

    Yup. You got the point of the article: Socialization. Thanks for reiterating.

  7. bliss2go says:

    Thanks for your praise! Appreciate it! Not familiar with that particular study, but yes, sounds about the same. Anger comes up when naming the victim, as I'm sure is evident right here. 😉

    Gender studies: one of the last frontiers of evolving. The female minority is the largest group discriminated against in the world; yet, every other discrimination seems to provoke more serious consideration.