Every now and then, some poor martyr tries to talk about men victims of violence. In short – he thinks – we evolve, we make a lot of talk of parity, the times will be mature. And every time it is denied. So it happened to Chiara del Guerra, councilor for equal opportunities of the Town Hall of Rome, who established a listening desk for mistreated men. Rightly, he said, equal opportunities applies to everyone, not only for women.

Affirmation that does not make a turn, and that a medium normal person should find logic: female victims have centers to contact (rightly), we will begin to create also those for male victims. But, as we know, logic is thunderously absent by certain feminist environments, or self -styled such. It is equally respect for men and the idea that they can experience difficulties and suffering too: they are privileged by the patriarchate, come on, we know it.

The usual indignant and ferocious reactions

Here, therefore, that the laudable proposal of Del War is welcomed by indignation and outrage, not only by the councilor for equal opportunities of the Municipality of Rome, but even by the Senator Valente, as well as by the usual Roman feminist associations, who have already hindered other times even the creation of services for men, but precisely the idea itself that could be talked about. The criticisms, or rather the accusations, are more or less the same for all. Meanwhile, it is mystification to speak of mistreated men, because they do not exist, they are a contradiction in terms. And of course they do not exist: we ignore them.

In addition, propose that a harassing and humiliated man find listening and support undermines the struggle itself against Patriarchate, who only now is starting to give the first pale fruits. Do we want to subtract from women what have laboriously conquered? No, and in fact the counter does not replace any service dedicated to female victims; It is just an addition, which does not take anything away from anyone.

Women can only be victims

And then: gender violence specifically concerns women. It is not possible that the roles are reversed (which we detest and have proudly deconstructed), that the female gender can be violent and the male victim. Otherwise we should organize cultural events on what we base them, what do our books base them, how do we take funds on the right and missing?

Finally, it is not true that in cases of separation the mothers tend more than fathers to be advantaged, they tend more to psychological violence, and to alienate the offspring from the father, preventing him from having contacts with his children. Alienare? Look that parental alienation is not a syndrome. And if it is not a syndrome, evidently, precisely because we follow logic, does not exist. There are no manipulative and underground behaviors aimed at making children think that the other parent does not take care of them, that it is a bad person, who has abandoned them. And in any case if they exist it is obvious that women cannot implement them.

What is the reason for all this resistance?

Fortunately, the councilor of the war did not break down in front of these “convincing” objections, but reiterated that his department serves to guarantee equality of treatment, rights and possibilities for both genres. At this point, as always, it still remains and only the same question: why does someone who say to be fighting for fairness gives so much annoyed the idea that a man is helped? That can learn to express his suffering, to recognize an abuse, to denounce, to be listened to? How to try to improve human lives worsens others? And how is it possible to define themselves in equal, but even before human, when thus hinder the well -being of half of the population thus fiercely?

I know the answer; I hope it is now that this king so naked and ridiculous also gives it to many others.