Both your comment and the flagged comment make that claim.
It seems much more so the case that people can care about how bad actions affect both female and male victims than the hypothesis you propose.
And, in fact, straight white men can be in a position of power, and have advantages, and also be able to share stories where they are victims, and find support. These things do not have to be black and white and contradictory.
Who the victim is and how they are affected does not speak about who the transgressor is, nor does it do so in inflexible, absolute terms. So the effects of being a victim can be explored without going into a "victim mentality" as someone who does not happen to be the primary focus of this article.
They can, but that doesn't mean they do. It is dangerous to be caught caring about men or boys. Consider this recent SNL skit "man park": https://youtu.be/9XOt2Vh0T8w?t=131. I've linked to the part where a woman is saying something sympathetic to men, and then panics that she'll be caught on camera saying it. This is after showing men in a dog park. E.g. equating them to dogs.
Note that my comment was NOT triggered by the OP's study, but rather that a comment was flagged and killed stating something that I think is obviously true, but quite inconvenient for some people to read.
Not at all in my experience. Comedy skits aren't evidence, or we could have some very interesting discussions!
As men, our expected place in society is to contain our emotions. To be silent. Our traumas are not ours to share. The social costs of doing otherwise are unbearable. Society has no tolerance for our victimhood. ...The Audacity!
So yes, exactly. No one cares about men.
The parent reads like the ever-present 'reverse discrimination' complaint, but it's not the same. Discrimination and prejudice are about power. If the abuser doesn't have the power, they are a lot less dangerous.
This is true statistically, but I think OP's point is that statistics should not be used to dismiss individual experiences. Daniel Shaver was white, for example. Cheye Calvo was a white mayor when his house was raided (speaking of power!).
Thing is, police has too much power relative to the vast majority of citizens. The delta varies drastically between different population groups, but it's "too much" for all of them.
No, it's true really. White people, overall, really have much more real power. It's not a number in a report, but a hard fact of reality.
And then, any time racism comes up, lots of white people find any way to downplay it.
This is Qanon-level conspiracy thinking. By and large, white folks are safer around police because their interactions are qualitatively different from the interactions Black folks have with police.
To be sure, this includes quite a bit of anti-Black racism within police forces, but even that is better described as prejudice than "white folks have undue power in the legal system". Also, to be clear, the criminal justice system does tend to screw over marginalized Black communities in countless ways - and this impacts the kinds of interactions Black folks have w/ police, but even that is a matter of bad structural/institutional design, not white folks individually having too much power.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2011/jul/17/the-rape-of-...
Sexual abuse is to women as police violence is to black people. These classes of people are affected more (far more - perhaps 2x?) than others, but that doesn't mean others aren't affected. A broader class of victim lets you draw lines more clearly: BLM isn't about police vs black people, it's really about police vs not-police. Sexual violence isn't about men vs women, its also about abuse of power, over children. Children includes boys and girls of all colors, of all religions, of all sexual orientations.
Abuse of power knows no gender or race. Mothers abuse their sons. Teachers abuse their students. The more we allow the culture to ignore some abuse to make other abuse more narratively appealing, the more we abandon those victims that don't fit the protected class, and the worse we do at actually identifying the problem itself. This is a great moral and practical failing, an example of the potency of left-wing "other"ing.
The culture does not want to hear from victimized men, especially straight white men. It is okay to withhold empathy, because SWMs are "powerful", they always have been and they always will be, and are to blame for most, if not all, of the worlds problems, especially abuse of power in all its forms, they say.
We've been encouraged for years to express vulnerability, expressing more of a softer, feminine side. Now, we are punished for it, and then we get some unwanted appellation like "men's rights advocates", which is a liberal code for right-wing anti-feminist reactionaries working nefariously to maintain the status quo.
The dead comment is right: no-one cares about men. I will go further and say that its a deeply evil thing, and I fear for my 2-year-old son. This is a real fear, not a construction, and it should be okay to share the concern in a public forum without being attacked for saying something I'm not. But I know it will happen, anyway, because you cannot fight the tide.