Last refuge
Violence against women is a pervasive and deeply entrenched issue, manifesting across various cultures and societies throughout history. It has long been used as a tool of control, not only within the framework of individual relationships but also at a systemic level. From the dawn of civilization, violence against women has been tied to religious doctrines, cultural norms, and patriarchal power structures that positioned men as dominant and women as subservient.
Many ancient religions have played a pivotal role in justifying and perpetuating the subjugation of women. In these religious traditions, women were often portrayed as inherently sinful, weak, or in need of male guardianship. In Christianity, for example, the biblical story of Adam and Eve has been interpreted as positioning women as the original transgressors, whose actions led to humanity's fall from grace. Eve's sin has historically been used to justify the inferior status of women and, by extension, their punishment or control through violence. Similar themes of female inferiority or moral weakness are present in other religious traditions, including Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, and many ancient polytheistic faiths.
In these early societies, women’s bodies and their sexuality became a primary target for religious regulation. The control of women’s sexual autonomy was viewed as necessary to preserve family honor, lineage, and male power. Practices such as stoning women for adultery, honor killings, and female genital mutilation often had religious sanction and were designed to control women’s behavior by instilling fear and submission. These violent practices were institutionalized through religious edicts, reinforcing the notion that women were the property of men—either their fathers or husbands—and that violence was an acceptable means of regulating their conduct.
The rise of patriarchal societies further solidified the use of violence as a means to control women. Patriarchy, as a system of social organization, is predicated on the belief that men are naturally suited to rule and that women are inherently subordinate. This system created a power imbalance that institutionalized male dominance in both public and private spheres. The control of women became synonymous with maintaining social order, and violence was one of the primary tools used to enforce this control.
In ancient Greece and Rome, for example, laws gave husbands the right to physically discipline their wives as part of maintaining the household. The Roman paterfamilias was the male head of the family and had almost absolute authority over women in his household, including the legal right to beat them. Similarly, in many medieval European societies, women were seen as inferior to men, both intellectually and morally, which justified their oppression. Women accused of witchcraft were frequently subjected to horrific acts of violence, such as burning at the stake or being drowned, acts that were often endorsed by both religious and legal authorities.
The witch hunts and trials that swept across Europe and North America from the 15th to the 18th centuries were not simply about rooting out heresy or punishing those thought to engage in occult practices. At their core, these persecutions were often about controlling women, particularly those who defied the restrictive roles imposed on them by patriarchal society. The violence directed at women during these witch hunts served as a mechanism for disciplining those who were perceived as too independent, too knowledgeable, or too assertive, threatening the male-dominated social order of the time.
Women accused of witchcraft were often those who had strayed from conventional expectations of femininity. Many of them were healers, midwives, or herbalists, possessing knowledge about medicine and the natural world that made them powerful within their communities. In a time when the church and male-dominated institutions sought to control knowledge and power, these women represented a threat. Their expertise, particularly in areas related to birth and health, granted them influence that could challenge the authority of both the church and male physicians. Branding these women as witches provided an excuse to strip them of this power, often through brutal torture and execution.
The witch hunts also targeted women who did not conform to social expectations of subservience and chastity. Widows, unmarried women, and those who lived on the fringes of society were particularly vulnerable to accusations. In a patriarchal system that valued women primarily as wives and mothers, those who existed outside these roles were viewed with suspicion. Their independence was interpreted as dangerous, a sign that they were not under the control of a male guardian. The violence enacted upon them served as a warning to other women to stay within the boundaries prescribed by society, reinforcing the idea that women who sought too much autonomy would be punished.
Sexuality was another crucial element in the witch hunts. Accusations of witchcraft often centered on women’s supposed ability to seduce men or engage in illicit sexual behavior, with many confessions obtained under torture detailing interactions with the devil in sexually explicit terms. This focus on sexuality reveals the deep-seated anxiety about women’s sexual power, which was seen as something that needed to be controlled. By accusing women of engaging in diabolical sex, society could justify violence against them under the guise of purifying moral corruption. This allowed for the repression of women’s sexual freedom, reinforcing their dependence on men and the church for moral guidance.
The sheer brutality of the witch trials—burning, drowning, hanging—underscored the extent to which society was willing to go to maintain control over women. Public executions not only served to eliminate the accused but also acted as a spectacle of discipline for other women. The violent repression of witches became a tool to scare women into submission, ensuring that they did not stray from their roles as obedient daughters, wives, and mothers. The gruesome nature of the punishment signaled that any attempt to resist patriarchal authority would be met with severe consequences.
In this way, the witch hunts were not just a religious or legal phenomenon but a social one, aimed at disciplining women who were perceived as too free, too powerful, or too different. Women who dared to assert independence, whether through knowledge, lifestyle, or sexuality, were branded as witches and subjected to extreme violence. The witch hunts served as a method of reinforcing the societal control of women, ensuring that female autonomy remained suppressed and that traditional gender roles were preserved in service to the broader patriarchal order.
These societal norms were built on the belief that women were not fully autonomous beings, but rather subjects whose behavior and bodies needed to be controlled to preserve male power. The resulting violence—whether through domestic abuse, legal punishment, or social ostracism—was a tool that reinforced patriarchal authority and diminished women’s opportunities for autonomy and equality.
As societies evolved, violence against women took on new dimensions. The violence was no longer only an instrument to control women within the family; it was employed as a broader mechanism of social control. In many instances, women were punished not just for transgressions against individual men, but for challenging the societal norms that defined and constrained their roles.
For instance, in the early modern period, women who sought to enter male-dominated professions or political arenas were often met with violence or intimidation. Women’s participation in public life was seen as a threat to the social order, and violence was used to suppress their voices. The fear of physical harm, sexual assault, or social ruin kept many women from advocating for their rights or seeking independence. Even in cases where women were not physically harmed, the threat of violence hung over them, creating an environment of constant fear and self-censorship.
Sexual violence, in particular, became a powerful tool of political control. During times of war and conquest, rape was often used as a weapon against women, serving as a means of humiliating and demoralizing the enemy. The bodies of women became battlegrounds on which political and military conflicts were fought, reinforcing the idea that women were merely possessions to be taken, traded, or destroyed as part of the spoils of war.
Despite significant progress in women's rights over the past century, violence against women remains a global issue, manifesting in both overt and subtle forms. Domestic violence, sexual harassment, human trafficking, and female genital mutilation continue to afflict millions of women worldwide, often under the pretext of maintaining traditional gender roles or preserving family honor. While many of these practices are no longer explicitly sanctioned by religion or law, the cultural attitudes that support them are deeply rooted in the same religious and patriarchal structures that have existed for millennia.
Violence against women manifests in various forms, ranging from physical abuse to sexual violence and coercion, often inflicted by intimate partners.
According to the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence (NCADV), 1 in 4 women experience severe intimate partner physical violence, sexual violence, or stalking, with impacts including injury, fear, PTSD, or the need for health services. These statistics underscore the severity and gendered nature of intimate partner violence, highlighting the disproportionate impact on women. Furthermore, 1 in 3 female murder victims are killed by intimate partners, compared to 1 in 20 male victims, illustrating how intimate partner violence escalates to deadly outcomes, especially for women. The presence of a gun in domestic violence situations increases the risk of homicide by 500%, further emphasizing the lethality of intimate partner violence.
Sexual harassment and violence is another pervasive issue, with 8 in 10 women in the U.S. have reported experiencing some form of sexual harassment in their lifetime and 2 in 10 women experiencing rape at some point in their lives, according to the National Sexual Violence Resource Center (NSVRC). Additionally, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reports that 1 in 3 women endure contact sexual violence in their lifetime. Despite these alarming statistics, sexual violence often goes unreported, with only 25% of rapes being reported to the police. Of those reported cases, only 5.7% lead to an arrest, and a mere 0.7% of rapists are convicted, reflecting significant gaps in the justice system’s response to sexual assault.
The psychological and physical toll of sexual violence on survivors is profound. According to RAINN (Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network), 94% of women who are raped experience symptoms of PTSD within the first two weeks after the assault, and 33% of survivors contemplate suicide, with 13% attempting it. Beyond the immediate trauma, survivors of sexual violence are more likely to suffer from long-term mental health issues, including depression and anxiety, as well as chronic physical ailments, such as pain and reproductive health problems, underscoring the far-reaching impacts of sexual violence on women’s lives.
Compounding these issues, police violence and misconduct further exacerbate the vulnerabilities of marginalized women. Women of color, particularly Black women, face disproportionately high rates of police violence. A 2017 study found that Black women are nearly twice as likely to be killed by police as white women. Moreover, 1 in 5 cases of police misconduct involves sexual abuse, according to the Cato Institute. It is deeply alarming that comprehensive statistics on police sexual abuse of women are largely unavailable, highlighting a significant gap in accountability and transparency within law enforcement institutions. The power dynamics between law enforcement and civilians often deter victims from reporting these crimes, creating a culture of silence around police sexual misconduct and leaving many women, especially those from marginalized groups, without protection or recourse.
Throughout history, violence against women has been a mechanism for asserting control and maintaining male dominance. This violence was not only physical but served as a tool for reinforcing patriarchal power structures, keeping women subjugated socially, economically, and politically. Historically, this manifested in overt forms such as domestic abuse, sexual violence, and systemic practices like forced marriage and female genital mutilation. These acts of brutality were often legitimized or overlooked by institutions, cultures, and legal systems that prioritized male authority and control. Women were not only victims of physical violence but also of laws and customs that denied them autonomy, freedom, and rights over their own bodies and lives.
While these physical forms of violence still persist today, with domestic abuse, sexual assault, and human trafficking continuing to plague societies worldwide, the landscape of gender-based violence has evolved. In modern times, alongside physical abuse, there is a growing recognition of more subtle yet equally harmful forms of violence: political policy and microaggressions.
Political policies in the United States often function as instruments of gendered violence by reinforcing systemic inequality or failing to provide adequate protection for women, perpetuating harm in both explicit and subtle ways. For example, the lack of comprehensive legal protections for survivors of domestic violence is a critical issue. While the Violence Against Women Act has provided some legal recourse, there are significant gaps in its implementation. Many states still lack robust protections, such as universal access to restraining orders, and there is often insufficient funding for shelters and services that can support survivors. Furthermore, inconsistent enforcement of existing laws allows many perpetrators to evade justice, leaving survivors vulnerable and without meaningful recourse. This failure to protect women from intimate partner violence is, in effect, a form of systemic violence that disproportionately affects women.
Restrictive reproductive laws are another glaring example of political policy functioning as gendered violence. In recent years, the rollback of abortion rights, particularly after the overturning of Roe v. Wade in 2022, has drastically reduced women's autonomy over their own bodies. Laws that ban or severely restrict access to abortion force women to carry pregnancies to term, even in cases of rape, incest, or medical emergencies. These policies not only endanger women's physical health but also deny them the basic human right to make decisions about their own reproductive futures. In states where abortion access has been effectively eliminated, women are left without safe, legal options and are sometimes criminalized for seeking medical care. This is a clear manifestation of state-sanctioned violence against women, as these laws control and undermine women's agency.
Economic policies in the U.S. also disproportionately harm women, particularly women of color and those in lower socioeconomic brackets. The gender pay gap, which remains a persistent issue despite decades of advocacy, is one clear example. Women in the U.S. still earn about 82 cents for every dollar earned by men, with women of color earning even less. Policies such as the lack of mandatory paid family leave and affordable childcare compound the economic challenges women face. When women are forced to choose between earning a living and caring for their families, they are economically disadvantaged, limiting their ability to escape abusive relationships or secure stable housing. The economic precarity created by these policies perpetuates cycles of poverty and dependence, which can further entrench women in situations where they are vulnerable to violence and exploitation.
The lack of political will to address sexual harassment and assault in the workplace also contributes to systemic violence against women. Despite movements like #MeToo, many workplaces still fail to protect women from harassment, and legal frameworks are often inadequate. For instance, forced arbitration clauses in employment contracts frequently prevent survivors from seeking justice in court, silencing women and protecting perpetrators. Moreover, underreporting and inadequate enforcement mechanisms within police departments and judicial systems ensure that many cases of sexual assault are never prosecuted. This failure to provide justice is a form of institutional betrayal that leaves women unprotected and emboldens perpetrators.
These examples illustrate how U.S. political policies not only fail to protect women but also perpetuate systemic violence. When the government restricts reproductive rights, fails to ensure economic equality, and inadequately addresses domestic violence and workplace harassment, it reinforces the conditions that allow gender-based violence to persist. Such policies are not merely negligent; they are a form of structural violence that disproportionately impacts women, particularly those who are already marginalized. Addressing these issues requires not only policy reform but a fundamental shift in how society values and supports women's rights and well-being.
Microaggressions are subtle, often unconscious comments, behaviors, or actions that communicate hostile, derogatory, or negative messages to members of marginalized groups, including women. These behaviors are typically less obvious than physical violence but still serve to reinforce gender hierarchies and perpetuate sexism. Some examples of microaggressions against women include: seemingly lighthearted remarks about women’s emotional volatility, appearance, or sexual behavior, when men explain something to women in a condescending or patronizing manner, assuming the woman lacks knowledge or expertise, women are more frequently interrupted in meetings or discussions, signaling that their contributions are less valuable or worthy of attention, assuming a woman in the office will take notes, arrange meetings, or perform other "supportive" roles, even when her position does not require such tasks, or commenting on or critiquing a woman’s appearance in professional settings, often reducing her value to her physical looks rather than her competence.
Although microaggressions may seem minor when viewed individually, their cumulative effect on women is significant. These small, everyday slights and offenses create a hostile environment that undermines women's confidence, well-being, and sense of belonging. The psychological toll of constantly navigating microaggressions can lead to feelings of frustration, anger, or self-doubt, particularly in environments such as the workplace or academic institutions where women may already feel marginalized.
Microaggressions reinforce gender stereotypes by consistently placing women in subordinate roles. For instance, the assumption that women are better suited to nurturing roles or that they are less capable in fields like science, technology, or leadership perpetuates long-standing gender biases. When women are regularly reminded, even subtly, that they are not valued or seen as equals, these messages can inhibit their professional and personal growth.
While physical violence is often motivated by the desire to assert control over a woman's body or behavior, microaggressions serve a similar function by maintaining psychological and emotional control. These subtle forms of sexism are rooted in the same power dynamics that historically allowed men to control women through violence.
One of the key differences between physical violence and microaggressions is that the latter are often difficult to identify or challenge directly. Because microaggressions are frequently unintentional or framed as harmless, women may feel pressured to remain silent rather than risk being labeled as overly sensitive or difficult. This makes microaggressions a particularly insidious form of gender-based violence, as it allows sexism to persist while simultaneously gaslighting women into questioning the validity of their experiences.
Additionally, microaggressions often go unnoticed by others, allowing the perpetrator to escape accountability. In contrast to overt physical violence, which can provoke public outrage, microaggressions are more easily dismissed or downplayed as trivial. This allows the underlying power dynamics to remain intact, as women are discouraged from calling out the subtle ways in which they are undermined and devalued.
Microaggressions against women occur in all sectors of society, from workplaces to social interactions. One striking example is the gender pay gap, where women are often paid less than men for the same work. While the disparity in wages may not involve direct physical harm, it is the result of systemic sexism, where women’s labor is undervalued. The assumption that women are less competent or that their contributions are less worthy of high compensation is a microaggression with long-term economic consequences.
In professional settings, women in leadership roles often encounter microaggressions that undermine their authority. For instance, female leaders may be described as "bossy" or "overly aggressive" for exhibiting traits that are seen as positive in their male counterparts. These judgments send the message that women are not suited for leadership and that their assertiveness is unwelcome.
The normalization of microaggressions creates a culture where inequality persists. It undermines the progress made in gender equality by maintaining a status quo where women are subtly reminded of their subordinate position. While society has largely condemned physical violence against women, it has not yet fully reckoned with the pervasive harm caused by microaggressions.
Kamala Harris, the first female Vice President of the United States and the first woman of Black and South Asian descent to hold the office, has faced numerous instances of sexism and microaggressions that reflect broader societal biases. These comments and views are often rooted in gender and racial stereotypes, which reveal the challenges that women, particularly women of color, face in positions of power. Below are examples of how societal views and comments about Harris support sexism and microaggressions:
A common microaggression against Kamala Harris is the frequent questioning of her competence and qualifications for her role, despite her extensive career as a senator, attorney general, and district attorney. This reflects a broader societal tendency to undermine the achievements of women, particularly women of color, through comments that suggest they are not deserving of their success. A 2021 Pew Research Center study found that 59% of Americans believe that women still face significant barriers to getting top executive jobs, compared to men. This statistic reflects the skepticism Harris has faced regarding her leadership abilities, often seen in public discussions that downplay her qualifications and attribute her success to factors such as "identity politics" rather than her achievements.
For example, during the 2020 election campaign, Harris was often criticized as being a “token” choice for the vice-presidential role due to her gender and race, rather than for her political acumen and experience. This kind of commentary diminishes her accomplishments and reinforces the stereotype that women, especially women of color, do not earn their positions based on merit.
Harris has also been subject to the “angry Black woman” stereotype, which frames assertive women of color as overly aggressive or confrontational. For instance, during the 2020 vice-presidential debate, when Harris firmly stated, "I'm speaking," as she was repeatedly interrupted by her opponent, Mike Pence, many commentators framed her response as aggressive rather than assertive. This plays into a long-standing racial and gendered stereotype that frames Black women’s self-advocacy as hostile or unprofessional.
A 2021 survey by Lean In and McKinsey & Company found that 40% of women in senior positions report being interrupted or spoken over in professional settings, a problem that is even more pronounced for women of color. Harris’s experience reflects how assertiveness from women is often misinterpreted through the lens of race and gender, reinforcing the microaggression that women should be more deferential, especially in male-dominated spaces.
Another example of microaggressions against Kamala Harris comes in the form of undue attention to her appearance, demeanor, and personal life—topics that are rarely scrutinized for male politicians. Comments on her wardrobe choices, facial expressions, and laugh have often overshadowed discussions about her policy positions. For example, Harris's laugh has been mocked and described as “fake” or “nervous” by commentators, a critique that is rarely directed at male politicians.
The disproportionate focus on appearance is a common issue for women in politics. According to research from the Barbara Lee Family Foundation, more than 50% of media coverage of women running for office centers on their appearance, voice, and family, rather than their policies or qualifications. This tendency reflects a broader societal expectation that women in leadership should conform to certain standards of femininity, and when they don’t, they are subject to criticism that undermines their professional contributions.
Kamala Harris has also faced microaggressions that highlight double standards in professionalism and behavior for men and women in politics. During her time in the Senate and throughout her vice-presidential campaign, Harris’s ambition was frequently portrayed negatively. Critics have described her as overly ambitious, suggesting that her drive for power was inappropriate or off-putting. This reflects a double standard, as ambition is typically seen as a positive trait in male leaders but is often framed as a negative trait in women.
A 2020 study by the Harvard Kennedy School’s Women and Public Policy Program found that ambition in women is often viewed with suspicion, while men are praised for similar traits, which reveals a deeply ingrained societal bias. For Harris, this manifested in constant scrutiny of her motivations and character, with her professional ambition framed as threatening or inauthentic—a subtle but pervasive form of sexism that limits the way women are allowed to navigate public life.
Harris has also been subjected to overtly racist and sexist insults, which reflect the intersectional nature of the discrimination she faces. For instance, derogatory terms such as “nasty” and “monster” were used by some public figures to describe her, terms that carry strong gendered connotations and are rarely applied to male politicians. In a 2021 survey by the National Women’s Law Center, 38% of women of color reported experiencing racial and gendered harassment in the workplace, a figure that reflects the unique challenges faced by women who, like Harris, occupy multiple marginalized identities.
Moreover, Harris has faced attacks that undermine her identity and legitimacy. For example, during the 2020 campaign, unfounded claims about her citizenship and eligibility for office circulated widely, similar to the “birther” conspiracy theories targeted at former President Barack Obama. These attacks reflect how women of color in leadership are often subject to a different set of rules and expectations, with their very right to hold power being questioned.
The irony of feminist issues is that they are often discussed and championed predominantly by women, despite the fact that these issues are societal and affect everyone. Feminism, at its core, seeks gender equality, but the responsibility to address and challenge sexism has disproportionately fallen on women. Men who support feminism tend to advocate for their daughters and other women in their lives, focusing on ensuring their safety and equality. While this is important, it misses a crucial aspect of the feminist movement: educating men and boys. True progress requires men not just to protect women but to actively dismantle the systems of inequality that they themselves are often unconsciously part of. And in doing so, we pave the way for reducing violence against women.
Men interested in feminism frequently share stories with their daughters, teaching them about strong female role models, equality, and resilience. However, this education is often framed as a conversation about women for women, rather than a societal issue that men are responsible for addressing as well. Boys grow up seeing feminism as something that concerns women alone, leading them to believe that they do not have a role in fighting sexism. The reality is that men’s involvement is crucial in achieving gender equality, and this involvement must begin at a young age. Boys should be taught from an early age about respect, empathy, and the ways in which gender inequality affects everyone, not just women. By including boys in this conversation, we can prevent many of the harmful attitudes that lead to the mistreatment and violence against women from taking root in the first place.
A key part of this education involves teaching boys about the historical and modern struggles women face. From workplace discrimination to reproductive rights, from sexual violence to unpaid labor, these are issues that men should not only be aware of but should feel responsible for addressing. When men are raised to see feminism as part of their responsibility, they can grow into allies who actively work to dismantle sexism in their everyday lives. Boys should hear stories about how gender stereotypes harm both women and men, and how dismantling those stereotypes benefits everyone. When feminism is seen as a human issue rather than a "women’s issue," the movement gains the strength of all people advocating for change. This broader engagement by men can directly contribute to less violence against women by reducing the cultural and structural conditions that perpetuate it.
What needs to happen in America is a fundamental shift in how we educate boys about feminism. This is not to say that men should dominate the conversation, but they must be active participants. Too often, boys are taught to avoid behaviors that harm women, but they are rarely taught to challenge the systems that allow those behaviors to persist. This narrow approach misses the point that real change requires proactive engagement. Teaching boys to be good allies isn't just about ensuring they don't contribute to sexist behavior; it's about equipping them with the tools to actively fight against it. When boys understand how they can take action—whether it's challenging a sexist joke, supporting a female peer in leadership roles, or addressing the root causes of violence against women—they become empowered to create safer, more equitable environments. The education of boys needs to center around not just passive respect for women but proactive engagement in feminism, with an understanding that they play an essential role in creating a more equitable society. When men are educated early about the impact of sexism and the ways they can help dismantle it, there is a greater likelihood that they will resist behaviors and systems that lead to violence against women.
This also means that fathers need to speak to their sons about feminism, not just their daughters. Conversations about gender equality should not be relegated to lessons for girls about how to protect themselves or be strong in a male-dominated world. Boys need to hear stories about strong women, about the importance of equality, and about the ways they can challenge the sexist norms they will encounter throughout their lives. When fathers model these values for their sons, they help raise a generation of men who see feminism as their cause too. This family-based approach can reduce the likelihood of violent behavior by ensuring that boys grow up with the understanding that violence and control are not acceptable or necessary ways to assert masculinity or solve problems.
Moreover, when boys learn early on about women’s struggles, they grow into men who are less likely to perpetuate harmful behaviors. Instead of seeing feminism as a reactionary movement against men, they can understand it as a movement for fairness, justice, and equality. This shift in perspective is essential for real societal change. It’s not enough for men to say they support feminism; they need to understand the structural nature of sexism and be equipped to help dismantle it. The societal shift toward educating boys about these issues can have a profound effect on reducing gender-based violence, as they become men who are conscious of the role they play in fostering a safer and more respectful society.
Schools also play a pivotal role in educating boys about feminist issues. Curriculum changes that include discussions about gender inequality, women’s history, and the impact of sexism can help boys develop a deeper understanding of these issues. When schools provide boys with a feminist education, they contribute to raising a generation that sees equality not as a special interest, but as a fundamental human right. Schools can act as early intervention points, curbing the development of violent or harmful behaviors before they begin. This education, combined with consistent messaging at home and in society, will equip boys with the tools to challenge sexism and stand up against violence toward women.
The need for educating boys about feminist issues extends far beyond women's rights; it is about creating a culture of equality for all, including the rights of transgender individuals and other marginalized groups. Feminism, at its core, is about dismantling systems of oppression and ensuring that everyone, regardless of gender, identity, or sexual orientation, has equal rights and opportunities. When we teach boys about these values, we aren't just preparing them to support women's rights, but to advocate for a world where all individuals, including transgender people, are treated with dignity and respect. This education creates a culture that rejects not just sexism but all forms of gender-based violence and discrimination.
One effective program, Coaching Boys into Men (CBIM), targets high school male athletes and is delivered by their coaches. Research has shown that boys who participated in this program were more likely to recognize abusive behaviors and intervene when witnessing them, compared to those who did not. A study published in JAMA Pediatrics found that boys who participated in the CBIM program were 50% less likely to engage in abusive behaviors toward their female peers compared to boys who didn’t participate. Another evaluation revealed that male athletes who underwent CBIM were four times more likely to intervene when they witnessed peers engaging in harmful behaviors, compared to non-participants.
In essence, addressing the historical violence against women and recognizing the insidious nature of modern-day microaggressions is crucial to understanding how sexism has evolved. The physical and emotional violence that women have endured over centuries reflects deeply entrenched power imbalances that persist today in more subtle but equally harmful ways. Microaggressions, which may seem inconsequential on the surface, perpetuate gender inequality by reinforcing harmful stereotypes and normalizing sexist behavior. Therefore, the focus should not be solely on empowering women to combat these issues, but equally on educating boys to recognize and challenge these dynamics from a young age.
Educating boys about sexism is not merely an act of preventing future violence; it is about fostering a sense of responsibility and allyship. By teaching boys to question systemic inequalities and engage in the dismantling of patriarchal norms, we create a foundation for true gender equality. Boys who grow up with an understanding of the struggles women face—and who are equipped to challenge these injustices—become men who not only refrain from violence but actively contribute to a more just society. Ultimately, raising boys to be allies in the fight against sexism is key to both reducing violence and building a world where women can thrive as equals.
And who knows, maybe one day we’ll finally get those police departments to start counting the women they victimize—right around the same time we swear in our first woman president.
