A number of articles conveying contrarian statements of fact have accumulated in my files. Inarguably, they point to the degree to which we’re living in different realities. More arguably (although I think it’s still the case), they show how incorrect the mainstream narrative is.
Here’s one, from Toni Airaksinen on PJMedia:
A recent study has found that Canadian teen boys are more likely [than teen girls] to be victims of physical dating violence, a disparity that has been documented — but rarely reported on — by researchers in other English-speaking countries. …
Boys are “50 percent more likely to report physical dating violence” said [lead researcher Elizabeth] Saewyc, and that’s “a gap that has been more or less consistent for the last two decades.” While it’s a counterintuitive finding, Saewyc urged readers to put themselves in the place of teens.
“Think about how generally unacceptable for boys and young men to actually haul off and slap a girl. But for girls, there isn’t the same social sanction for hitting a guy, whether they’re dating or not,” said Saewyc.
Saewic’s explanation is basically that girls are allowed to hit boys, while boys’ hitting girls is treated as one of the worst things they could possibly do. Thus, girls are a little more willing to act out with physical violence. Of course, the fact that the numbers are even closely balanced suggests that talk about men’s inherently beastliness and “toxic masculinity” is simply left-wing propaganda.
Perhaps I’m old fashioned, but having different standards for one sex than the other doesn’t strike me as a terrible imbalance. However, as Instapundit Glenn Reynolds periodically states, chivalry was a system that imposed rules for both sides. The problem isn’t necessarily that we have a double standard for any particular behavior, but that we’re only permitting double standards to disadvantage one side of the gender divide.