SFP

Jonas G

Valkyrie: Now with 100% less nazis. 🙂

Lostman

let’s hope this Valkyrie doesn’t end up like that other one…
Nexxo

_Fewer_ nazis.

Signed: grammar nazi. Oh, damn.
- Hawthorne
  
  Grammar Nazi. Big N. But I don’t believe in capital punishment, and appreciate our communal effort to fix things socially. Full Marx all round.

spriteless

I was worried someone had started a horrible thread and gotten all the responses removed.

Is this a ‘wait, this disproportionately helps people who are already priveledged’ or is it a ‘wait this gonna upset Moonshadow’ or ‘wait a lot of this can be done by non-supers too’ ?

masterofbones

>this disproportionately helps people who are already priveledged

How do you mean?

>this gonna upset Moonshadow

Hopefully she isn’t going to shape her life around the desires of a murderous psychopath.

>this can be done by non-supers

This is one of my biggest concerns. Stuff like this already exists, so I’m not really sure what she thinks she will be bringing to the table.
- spriteless
  
  >>this disproportionately helps people who are already priveledged
  >
  >How do you mean?
  
  I mean, people with phones, people who live near large population centers, people who speak english (if they don’t have a translator they will probably get a translator), people in countries where at least a lot of people won’t act like it is the woman’s fault… I said privilege because it is stuff easy to take for granted if dealing with it isn’t already normal for you.
  - AnathemaD
    
    “people in countries…”
    They’re American, so it stands to reason they would, at least in the beginning, be rolling out this program or whatever in the US, where over 90% of adults have cell phones. I don’t see the necessity for English ability, as surely there are multi-lingual heroes. And just as likely there are heroes who live in rural areas, and/or ones like Allison whose anomalies render distance moot. Yes, this will probably be more accessible for some people than others, like most things, but it isn’t as weighted as all that. The addition of powered people makes services like this MORE accessible.
  - motorfirebox
    
    Well… assuming that the program’s initial target area is the US, cellphone ownership in the US passed 91% in 2013. While Valkyrie is less helpful to that 9%, it seems to me like the best way to address that 9% isn’t to do something other than Valkyrie—it’s to get cellphones into the hands of that 9% so that they’re also served by Valkyrie. The other issues you bring up also strike me as being similarly more easily solvable through expanding Valkyrie than by doing something else entirely.
    
    And, really, if the population of people who need help is large enough, focusing on the one who are more privileged first is completely viable, assuming limited resources and time. If you’re trying to rescue people off the Titanic, you don’t start with the ones still in their cabins, you start with the ones by the lifeboats.
    
    I mean, I don’t want to minimize the problem of getting help to people who need help more, but there’s a balancing act there. Taken to its logical extreme, you end up discarding any plan that doesn’t prioritize certain regions of Africa and Southeast Asia to the exclusion of everywhere else.
  - Ian Osmond
    
    Phone ownership isn’t a mark of privilege — plenty of homeless people have phones, for instance. Indeed, I would say, if you’re homeless, a phone is VITAL — if you’ve got a car to sleep in, a phone, and a gym membership so you can shower, you can fake not-homelessness well enough to hold down a job.
    
    A phone is more important to one’s continued functioning in society than a stable address is.

S.I. Rosenbaum

Wait … this is a terrible idea

Iarei

I thought we already established that all the ideas are terrible anyway.
Walter

I don’t think so. It isn’t going to be profitable, but if she knows a bunch of heroines who are well set up financially they could do worse with their time than bodyguard for a notably at risk population. It won’t hurt anything, anyway.
masterofbones

I don’t find it particularly amazing, but I don’t see how it is a *terrible* idea. I figure it will at least have a net positive impact.

rpenner

“I don’t wanna sound paranoid … but we should be more paranoid.”

Matthew Dowd

I hope it’s “Wait-” “What about abused men?”

Markus

Something something Duluth model is a terrible system that minimizes male victims of abuse.
- spriteless
  
  Not just something something, thing of things. ~1/4 of rape survivors are men, and women are capable of abuse. citation: study linked in thing of things https://thingofthings.wordpress.com/2015/02/28/346/
  - telk
    
    The full study that blog post uses (they only link to the summary) is here: http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/nisvs_report2010-a.pdf
    
    Relevant pages are 18/19; tables 2.1 and 2.2.
    
    It’s an interesting read, but useful, as the study is often abused my MRAs, who seem to find it useful to forget that gay people exist and thus assume men only abuse women (and vice versa). I was happy to see that the blog post above does not do this, and actually seems solid.
Pol Subanajouy

I get the feeling that the services would get extended to abused men too.
Classtoise

I’m thinking so. Especially in a world with biodynamics (i.e your wife can now shoot icicles at you, or your girlfriend can kick the door you’re hiding behind down). This isn’t to diminish the troubles and fears that women go through in these situations, but men face a lot of stigma looking for help.
Prodigal

I’m a two-time abuse survivor, and was thinking the same thing.
Devlerbat

Actually, now that I think about it, what about them? That is not to say that abused men are not a thing or that they don’t need or deserve help, that would be crazy talk. And yes it does seem like they are forgetting about abused men, but remembering them doesn’t really provide much of a conundrum really worthy of a “wait,” more of an “oh yea.” Its not like they would refuse to help abused men that asked for it, at least I know Alison wouldn’t.
- Matthew Dowd
  
  Not an abuse victim but a person who has seen it from his time in homeless shelters. Women get a secure place that is as guaranteed safe as the people running it can make it. Men get none of that. They might get a bed in a place that wants them gone from 7am to 5 pm, offers no therapy or assistance and anyone who needs to find them can just call the desk to confirm they’re there…
  - Devlerbat
    
    I’m confused as to why this would prevent Alison and other heroes from helping abused men.
    - Matthew Dowd
      
      I never said it wouldn’t but I was pointing out by parallel experience that the apparatus in place for protecting women is BY AND FAR superior than that for men in the same experience. I am by no means an MRA but there is some serious gender inequality with regards to this in the United States.

paksenarrion-reader

‘Wait… is Mary gonna be a good girl again if I do this? No? Damn, thought so’

Josh Jasper

Reminds me of the real world The Open Source Women Back Each Other Up Project from various science fiction conventions.

Oakreef

wow that turned into Uber a lot faster than I expected

notquiteotaku

“Wait… I’ve been awake for like two days.”

(passes out)

funnyasinhaha

I think it’s gonna be ‘wait i just wanted it to be a superhero club’

Arthur Frayn

“Wait, …I don’t have a home.”
“Well, not YOU, but women in general.”

OmnipotentEntity

No one mentioned it yet, but I think the “Wait” might have something to do with Patrick having all the rights to everything that Lisa produces.

MisterTeatime

I don’t think Valkyrie is going to require any new patents. These technologies already exist; it’s just a matter of plugging them into each other and into the userbase.

Keith

Globally:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140673613610302
Women are six times more likely than men to be murdered by an intimate partner, with rich countries having a higher rate than poor ones

But there’s nuance
http://vaw.sagepub.com/content/6/4/409.short
http://cad.sagepub.com/content/41/4/496.short

On the whole, from these older data, it looks like men were about half as likely to be murdered by intimate partners than women. But Black men are actually slightly *more* likely to be murdered by by an intimate partner than black women. During that time, partner homicide was on the decline in general, but not for white women.

Kid Chaos

“Wait…I need a new cellphone. Quick! To the Apple Store!”

sbpr

So, here’s the thing. Punching someone or shooting another someone. Because one is worse or bad, does that make the other…. good? No, they’re both still bad. Yes, the variance in severity of consequences is a thing, but if you say one doesn’t matter because the other is worse, you’re dooming one side or the other to obscurity and that is NOT the path or answer to real equality or justice.

Random832

Is the latter a percentage of murders or a percentage of men? Because of it’s a percentage of murders they can be multiplied together for 1.5x.

Random832

The thing is, it’s not a static thing. Any new element biased towards one gender is also a new tool that abusers of that gender can use as a weapon against their victims. Especially when that element is composed of people accustomed to administering extrajudicial punishment.

Shino

… What? How exactly abused women being protected from being murdered serves female abusers?
- Random832
  
  Didn’t see this reply at the time. My point is, the important question is: what are they (where “they” is a group of people who are accustomed to using violence against people clearly designated as “evil”) going to do to men who are *accused* of being a threat? How do they avoid being used as a proxy by an abuser?

fairportfan

I hate to be That Guy – but “discrete” means separate, unique or individual.

“Discreet” means “won’t tell your secrets”.

(Don’t get me started on “its/it’s”, “flaunt/flout” or “Chaise lounge”…)

masterofbones

But what ideas need changing? I don’t know of anyone that thinks DV is a *good* thing. I don’t know of anyone that argues that it doesn’t exist. I don’t know of anyone that argues that DV victims don’t need help.

I would just argue that this just isn’t an efficient allocation of resources, and my argument gets stronger *the more* superheroes get in on this.

But at least it is better than drug busts.

UnsettlingIdeologies

In order for it to be an inefficient allocation of resources, there needs to be some more efficient allocation of resources. What is it that biodynamics should be doing? We get the impression that most are 1) just living their lives and not really using powers at all, 2) dealing with drugs and other low level crimes, 3) killing/policing immigrants, or 4) just waiting around for the very rare instances when real super-powered threats show up.

I’d say this is at least an improvement in the allocation of resources from the current situation. And if someone comes up with a better reallocation, they can do that then.

Azeldan

Doesn’t this mean Templar owns the app? She hasn’t found a way out of her contract yet.

Daniel Vogelsong

She’s not patenting anything. So far it’s a concept and a website using existing internet protocols

masterofbones

If someone said, “we have the choice between helping everyone that needs help, and only helping 75% of the people that need help” which would you choose?

GaryFarber

Discreet isn’t “discrete.” 🙁

Matthew Dowd

I made no statement about abused women, the thing is that the resources for domestically abused women in the US are readily available for any woman who wants them in many places. My wife is a former abuse victim I have nothing but respect for those who get away from their abusers and move on with their lives.

Walter

That’s a pretty good takedown, and I can’t dispute any part of it, but its important to remember that “All the superheroes get together and knit” is still better than murderous rampage, which is explicitly in the cards. Bodyguarding is better than knitting.

Really, what we want from superheroes is to fight villainous supers and not take over the gov. In the absence of villains you could find far worse for them to do than be SWAT or bodyguard at-risk populations. This is a better plan than no plan.

neyta

Murderous rampage is hardly off the table with this plan. As say Erin Pizzey noted, 60 out of 100 women at her women’s shelter for battered women were violent back to their partners. You’re putting poorly trained teenagers who are known for their short impulse control and smashing things up on instinct with potentially frustrating and potentially violent people who could get them very angry. Moreover, many heroes are poor and homeless, like our heroine, and so are under financial stress- not all will have a billionaire inventor to sleep over with- and so I can certainly see some getting mad and going on a rampage.

Particularly if any people they help fit the stereotype and go back to their abusive partners. For the kids? Because they feel they can change them? Due to threats to their kids? Whatever reason it’s a stress to the fragile psyches of heroes.

Some patience is needed to work at such a place.

She would do better to actually ask battered women shelters what they actually need in terms of aid, rather than demanding (or politely asking) they support her plan on her terms

MisterTeatime

The superheroes don’t have to engage in any actual violence for this to help people. They can be purely a deterrent measure. (Frankly, this is the outcome I’m expecting in most cases. If you’re thinking about starting a fight with someone, and then you realize that person is currently walking down the street next to Mega Girl and having a pleasant conversation with her, you’re probably going to rethink your plans.) And that will still help the victims immensely, by giving them time to rebuild their confidence and support structures without a constant feeling of danger.
It might even be more effective than armed guards doing the same thing. I have a feeling that even with Tandry Connors out there, there are still numerous women who will find Alison easier to entrust with their safety than an unfamiliar police officer. People like celebrities.

Plus, there’s the secondary effect. We already know that news media pays disproportionate attention to what biodynamic individuals are doing, so this plan will result in cameras being pointed at the problem of intimate partner violence. More news coverage, more public awareness, more consideration from the people in power, more opportunities for systemic and/or cultural change.

neyta

As we’ve seen in story lots of people are willing to challenge superheroes or be assholes to them. It might serve as a deterrent, might not, depends on the superhero. In another non approved comment I noted the issue- there are good statistics showing that a lot of domestic violence is reciprocal and that a lot of people return to their partners. So you’ve got a frustrating situation involving often violent people that poorly trained teenagers with highly destructing powers will be thrown into.

Also, these heroes seem to be rather poor often enough. Or homeless like Allison and Feral. They don’t necessarily have the resources to protect someone for weeks on end.

The cameras issue is important. They’d do a lot better focusing a lot on advocacy first. People would listen to a lot of heroes protesting in state or country capitols for funding for domestic violence centers and social support. With greater funding, a center in every city, they would be able to be a lot more effective. They could give a lot better targeted aid.

Devon Jolly

The last few pages man… Every city in america has a battered women’s shelter. Believe me, I’ve been homeless and drifting long enough to be in a lot of them, and finding a men’s shelter is a pain if even available because most of the shelters are police protected women’s only. It’s not like this isn’t being done.

By FBI stats, 15,686 murders were committed in america, in 2010, a rate which has been steadily decreasing every year since 1967 when the study starts.
14% were committed by women(2196), 86% by men (13490)
60% of murders committed by women are against men they’re close to, friends, family, intimate partners. (1301)
30% are against women they’re close to. (651)
10% against strangers. (217)
These stats skews heavily when you include male suicides post separation to murder.

Men otoh, 83% were against other men. (11197)

75.3% were against men they don’t know. (10158)

14.3% of cases were against women. (1929)

7.6% of cases being female friend, family or intimate partner. (1025)

Couple that with the 1:70 women being in the week after they leave you, (as posited by the study you reference) and whoa does the intimate female murder rate look skewed. particularly when feminism is encouraging women to leave men on mass. 14 murders in household, to 1011 post separation, vs 1301 women murdering men.

It seems pretty even. Equality yay?
Of course, every study ever done is cherry picked, so who’s to say if your or my numbers are even accurate to begin with.

MaxArt

“I still don’t have a phone!”