Poland to withdraw from Istanbul Convention

[Vassenor]

So it's sexist to say that domestic violence should have consequences now. Huh.

Fuck yeah cool story, could use some more dragons for realism.

I mean that is what you're saying here.

[Soiled fruit roll ups]

Fuck yeah cool story, could use some more dragons for realism.

I mean that is what you're saying here.

Citation needed

[Arcturus Novus]

Does the Istanbul treaty have its issues? Yeah. Is it bad that Poland is withdrawing from it, as well as rolling back the rights of LGBTQ people? Also yeah.

Look, it doesn’t take a genius to see that Poland’s going into a phase of extreme social conservatism. It’s not gonna be a nice place to live for anyone who isn’t a straight, white, Christian Polish man very soon.

[Vistulange]

Does the Istanbul treaty have its issues? Yeah. Is it bad that Poland is withdrawing from it, as well as rolling back the rights of LGBTQ people? Also yeah.

Look, it doesn’t take a genius to see that Poland’s going into a phase of extreme social conservatism. It’s not gonna be a nice place to live for anyone who isn’t a straight, white, Christian Polish man very soon.

This, really.

Yeah, the language of the Istanbul Convention might have issues. Yes, it might not be recognising harmful acts perpetrated against men. However, that's not why Poland is withdrawing from the treaty, is it? Does anybody legitimately think Poland is withdrawing from the treaty so they can pioneer a more inclusive treaty, or is it just some diatribe that is actually missing the forest for the trees?

[Radfems Inc]

You're thrilled that a country will now ignore a treaty calling for prohibition of violence against women. Oh the message that sends...

Fuck yes, I love sending the right message.

Non sexist treaties for everyone.

You’re missing the point. To downplaying of men as victims of violence in Istanbul is a feature, not a bug. Women cannot be sexist against men because men still hold the power in these countries, and therefore “sexism against men” is nonsensical.

Besides that, most violence visited on men is by other men, and so stopping it can easily be done by men as a group whenever they decide to. No extra law or effort is needed to stop it, as they are doing it to themselves.

Istanbul is a good convention, and it’s focus on women victims is the correct thing to do.

[-Astoria-]

Does the Istanbul treaty have its issues? Yeah. Is it bad that Poland is withdrawing from it, as well as rolling back the rights of LGBTQ people? Also yeah.

Look, it doesn’t take a genius to see that Poland’s going into a phase of extreme social conservatism. It’s not gonna be a nice place to live for anyone who isn’t a straight, white, Christian Polish man very soon.

This.

[Soiled fruit roll ups]

Does the Istanbul treaty have its issues? Yeah. Is it bad that Poland is withdrawing from it, as well as rolling back the rights of LGBTQ people? Also yeah.

Look, it doesn’t take a genius to see that Poland’s going into a phase of extreme social conservatism. It’s not gonna be a nice place to live for anyone who isn’t a straight, white, Christian Polish man very soon.

This, really.

Yeah, the language of the Istanbul Convention might have issues. Yes, it might not be recognising harmful acts perpetrated against men. However, that's not why Poland is withdrawing from the treaty, is it? Does anybody legitimately think Poland is withdrawing from the treaty so they can pioneer a more inclusive treaty, or is it just some diatribe that is actually missing the forest for the trees?

Way to admit you don't see men as worth very much.

[Vistulange]

This, really.

Yeah, the language of the Istanbul Convention might have issues. Yes, it might not be recognising harmful acts perpetrated against men. However, that's not why Poland is withdrawing from the treaty, is it? Does anybody legitimately think Poland is withdrawing from the treaty so they can pioneer a more inclusive treaty, or is it just some diatribe that is actually missing the forest for the trees?

Way to admit you don't see men as worth very much.

The strawman did nothing bad to you. Stop hitting the strawman.

[Vassenor]

Fuck yes, I love sending the right message.

Non sexist treaties for everyone.

You’re missing the point. To downplaying of men as victims of violence in Istanbul is a feature, not a bug. Women cannot be sexist against men because men still hold the power in these countries, and therefore “sexism against men” is nonsensical.

Besides that, most violence visited on men is by other men, and so stopping it can easily be done by men as a group whenever they decide to. No extra law or effort is needed to stop it, as they are doing it to themselves.

Istanbul is a good convention, and it’s focus on women victims is the correct thing to do.

Let's see your data.

[Radfems Inc]

You’re missing the point. To downplaying of men as victims of violence in Istanbul is a feature, not a bug. Women cannot be sexist against men because men still hold the power in these countries, and therefore “sexism against men” is nonsensical.

Besides that, most violence visited on men is by other men, and so stopping it can easily be done by men as a group whenever they decide to. No extra law or effort is needed to stop it, as they are doing it to themselves.

Istanbul is a good convention, and it’s focus on women victims is the correct thing to do.

Let's see your data.

Which part? Men in power or violence committed by whom against whom?

[Soiled fruit roll ups]

Fuck yes, I love sending the right message.

Non sexist treaties for everyone.

You’re missing the point. To downplaying of men as victims of violence in Istanbul is a feature, not a bug. Women cannot be sexist against men because men still hold the power in these countries, and therefore “sexism against men” is nonsensical.

Besides that, most violence visited on men is by other men, and so stopping it can easily be done by men as a group whenever they decide to. No extra law or effort is needed to stop it, as they are doing it to themselves.

Istanbul is a good convention, and it’s focus on women victims is the correct thing to do.

Yeah no.

[Vassenor]

Let's see your data.

Which part? Men in power or violence committed by whom against whom?

The data that you're basing the points in that post on.

[Radfems Inc]

Which part? Men in power or violence committed by whom against whom?

The data that you're basing the points in that post on.

You want me to prove men still have the majority of political power? Seriously?

[Soiled fruit roll ups]

Way to admit you don't see men as worth very much.

The strawman did nothing bad to you. Stop hitting the strawman.

I was just copying your pattern.

Its either no treaty or a non sexist treaty.

This but its kinda good cause at least it deals with half the problem.
Which it does.

But only by doubling the harm of the other half of the problem.

[Vassenor]

The data that you're basing the points in that post on.

You want me to prove men still have the majority of political power? Seriously?

I'm also not sure why you think that "most violence against men is perpetrated by other men" somehow disproves that men can be victims of domestic violence.

[Proctopeo]

A good move but probably for the wrong reasons. Still, it shouldn't be surprising that the pendulum is swinging back this hard in Poland, Hungary, and Slovakia.

Fuck yes, I love sending the right message.

Non sexist treaties for everyone.

You’re missing the point. To downplaying of men as victims of violence in Istanbul is a feature, not a bug. Women cannot be sexist against men because men still hold the power in these countries, and therefore “sexism against men” is nonsensical.

Besides that, most violence visited on men is by other men, and so stopping it can easily be done by men as a group whenever they decide to. No extra law or effort is needed to stop it, as they are doing it to themselves.

Istanbul is a good convention, and it’s focus on women victims is the correct thing to do.

Absolutely disgusting.

You want me to prove men still have the majority of political power? Seriously?

I'm also not sure why you think that "most violence against men is perpetrated by other men" somehow disproves that men can be victims of domestic violence.

It's also legitimately horrible to say that because there are men in a lot of positions of power, male victims of domestic violence don't matter. But that's a supremacist movement for you, innit?

[Mzeusia]

Poland withdrawing from the treaty doesn't seem good for women's rights. Are there issues with the treaty? Most likely. Is Poland withdrawing in protest of those flaws though? No, doesn't look like it. If Poland or any other country wanted to address those flaws, would a better option than withdrawal by reworking it rather than leaving? I'd say yes, then again, I'm a layman so I could be completely wrong.

[Gormwood]

The approach being pushed on the thread sounds like "Men First, Then The Women Whenever We Get Around To Them."

[Vistulange]

The strawman did nothing bad to you. Stop hitting the strawman.

I was just copying your pattern.

Its either no treaty or a non sexist treaty.

This but its kinda good cause at least it deals with half the problem.
Which it does.

But only by doubling the harm of the other half of the problem.

I don't recall using any strawmen. Even if I were, do you honestly think doing the same puts you in a better position?

And no, I don't subscribe to a binary view of the world where everything is objectively black or white. The Istanbul Convention has certain issues, which can be remedied without bailing out on it. That doesn't mean it's utter rubbish which ought to be completely abrogated. Seriously, this trend of considering everything as a binary choice between "good" and "bad" is very annoying.

[Soiled fruit roll ups]

The approach being pushed on the thread sounds like "Men First, Then The Women Whenever We Get around To Them."

Actually its explicitly the opposite of that.

But you know go off.

[Proctopeo]

The approach being pushed on the thread sounds like "Men First, Then The Women Whenever We Get around To Them."

More so "both are important, but we've ignored and even enabled issues harming men for too long and should maybe try and, you know, fix that". But I don't know what kind of lens you view the world through, so...

[Vassenor]

The approach being pushed on the thread sounds like "Men First, Then The Women Whenever We Get around To Them."

Actually its explicitly the opposite of that.

But you know go off.

So what is the approach then?

[Radfems Inc]

You want me to prove men still have the majority of political power? Seriously?

I'm also not sure why you think that "most violence against men is perpetrated by other men" somehow disproves that men can be victims of domestic violence.

It doesn’t disprove it, it’s just less important and less worthy of state action than domestic violence against women. The Istanbul convention recognizes this may even be coded into law:

4Special measures that are necessary to prevent and protect women from gender-based violence shall not be considered discrimination under the terms of this Convention.

They recognize this discrepancy here:

Recognising that women and girls are exposed to a higher risk of gender-based violence than men;

Recognising that domestic violence affects women disproportionately, and that men may also be victims of domestic violence;

It’s not that it doesn’t exist. It’s just not important.

[Proctopeo]

I'm also not sure why you think that "most violence against men is perpetrated by other men" somehow disproves that men can be victims of domestic violence.

It doesn’t disprove it, it’s just less important and less worthy of state action than domestic violence against women. The Istanbul convention recognizes this may even be coded into law:

4Special measures that are necessary to prevent and protect women from gender-based violence shall not be considered discrimination under the terms of this Convention.

They recognize this discrepancy here:

Recognising that women and girls are exposed to a higher risk of gender-based violence than men;

Recognising that domestic violence affects women disproportionately, and that men may also be victims of domestic violence;

It’s not that it doesn’t exist. It’s just not important.

Again, absolutely disgusting, and also again, supremacist movement.

[Soiled fruit roll ups]

Actually its explicitly the opposite of that.

But you know go off.

So what is the approach then?

Change the thing to be gender neutral.
Explicitly include all victims of domestic violence in the wording.
Ensure service providers provide for everyone who comes.
Defund researchers who promote a sexist view of domestic violence.