Jackson Katz: Violence against women—it's a men's issue

Summary

The speaker challenges the traditional framing of gender violence as 'women's issues,' arguing that it is fundamentally a men's issue. He emphasizes the need for men to take responsibility, questioning societal norms and institutions that contribute to abusive behaviors. The 'bystander approach' is introduced as a strategy for non-abusive men to challenge peers, fostering a culture where such actions are deemed unacceptable. The speaker calls for leadership from adult men with power to prioritize and address these issues, advocating for a collective effort to transform societal attitudes and prevent violence.

Takeaways

• 🔄 The speaker challenges the common perception that gender violence issues are solely women's issues, arguing that they are primarily men's issues.
• 👤 The script emphasizes that framing gender violence as a 'women's issue' allows men to disengage and ignore the problem, as they may perceive it as not concerning them.
• 🤔 The speaker points out the confusion around the term 'gender', illustrating that it is often mistakenly equated with 'women', thereby excluding men from the conversation.
• 📚 Through an analogy with race and sexual orientation, the script highlights how the dominant group in any context tends to be overlooked in discussions about identity and power.
• 📉 The script uses linguistic examples to show how language structures can shift focus away from perpetrators and onto victims, which can contribute to victim-blaming.
• 🤝 The speaker calls for a paradigm shift, urging men to take responsibility and play an active role in addressing and preventing gender violence.
• 💬 The importance of asking the right questions is stressed, with the speaker advocating for a focus on understanding why men perpetrate violence rather than focusing on women's actions.
• 🏢 The script discusses the role of societal institutions in perpetuating abusive behaviors and the need to examine these structures to effect change.
• 👦 The speaker addresses the impact of gender violence on boys and men, emphasizing that it's an issue that affects all genders and ages.
• 👨‍🏫 The 'bystander approach' is introduced as a strategy for preventing gender violence, encouraging those who witness inappropriate behavior to intervene and challenge it.
• 🗣️ The script concludes with a call to action for adult men with power to lead the way in addressing gender violence, rather than leaving it to women or younger men.

Q & A

What is the main argument presented by the speaker regarding gender violence issues?

The speaker argues that gender violence issues, such as sexual assault and domestic violence, should not be seen as solely women's issues but primarily as men's issues, as men are often the perpetrators.

Why does the speaker believe that framing gender violence as a 'women's issue' is problematic?

The speaker believes it's problematic because it gives men an excuse not to pay attention, as they may tune out when they hear the term 'women's issues,' and it also leads to confusion about the term 'gender,' which is mistakenly often equated with 'women.'

What is the confusion the speaker points out regarding the term 'gender'?

The confusion is that many people hear the word 'gender' and automatically think it refers to women, similar to how 'race' is often associated with non-white ethnic groups and 'sexual orientation' with non-heterosexual identities, overlooking the dominant group in each case.

How does the speaker illustrate the shift in focus from the perpetrator to the victim in language?

The speaker uses the example of changing an active sentence 'John beat Mary' to a passive one 'Mary was beaten by John,' and eventually to 'Mary is a battered woman,' showing how the focus and identity shift from the perpetrator to the victim.

What is the concept of 'bystander approach' introduced by the speaker?

The bystander approach is a method of preventing gender violence by focusing on those who are not direct perpetrators or victims but are part of the social environment. It encourages these individuals to challenge and interrupt abusive behaviors when they witness them.

Why is it important for men to challenge other men when they exhibit abusive behavior according to the speaker?

It is important because it helps create a peer culture where abusive behavior is seen as unacceptable. It also prevents the normalization of such behavior and holds men accountable for their actions, which can lead to a reduction in violence.

What role does the speaker suggest for adult men with power in addressing gender violence?

The speaker suggests that adult men with power should take on a leadership role, prioritizing and addressing gender violence issues. They should be held accountable for their actions and for promoting a culture of respect and non-violence.

How does the speaker address the issue of victim-blaming in the context of gender violence?

The speaker points out that victim-blaming is pervasive and stems from a cognitive structure that focuses on questioning the victim's choices and actions rather than addressing the perpetrator's behavior. He emphasizes the need to shift this focus.

What is the significance of the speaker's distinction between 'sensitivity training' and 'leadership training'?

The speaker believes that 'leadership training' is more effective because it addresses the root of the problem, which is the failure of leaders to promote a culture of respect and non-violence. 'Sensitivity training' may not necessarily change the underlying attitudes or behaviors.

How does the speaker view the role of institutions in the production of abusive men?

The speaker sees institutions such as religious organizations, sports culture, and family structures as playing a significant role in producing abusive men. He suggests that these institutions need to be examined and reformed to prevent the normalization of abusive behavior.

What is the speaker's call to action for men in the fight against gender violence?

The speaker calls for men to break their complicit silence, challenge each other, and stand with women in the fight against gender violence. He emphasizes the need for courage, strength, and moral integrity to effect change.

Outlines

00:00

🚫 Rethinking Gender Violence as Men's Issues

The speaker challenges the conventional view of gender violence issues, such as sexual assault and domestic violence, as solely women's issues. He argues that framing these problems as women's issues allows men to disengage and avoid responsibility. The speaker emphasizes that these are fundamentally men's issues and criticizes the tendency to overlook men's roles in these problems. He uses the analogy of race and sexual orientation to illustrate how dominant groups often go unexamined in discussions of societal issues. The speaker also highlights the linguistic shift in how domestic violence is described, showing how language can subtly shift focus away from the perpetrator (John) to the victim (Mary), thus perpetuating victim-blaming.

05:02

🤔 Questioning the Roots of Men's Violence

The speaker continues by urging a shift in the questions we ask about gender violence. Instead of focusing on the victim (Mary), he suggests that we should be asking why men (John) engage in violent behavior. He questions the societal, cultural, and institutional factors that contribute to the prevalence of men's violence, such as religious beliefs, sports culture, pornography, family structures, and economic conditions. The speaker emphasizes the need to understand these deeper, systemic issues rather than viewing perpetrators as isolated monsters. He also discusses the bystander approach to preventing gender violence, which involves changing the social norms and expectations that allow abusive behaviors to be tolerated or ignored.

10:02

👥 The Bystander Approach: Challenging Abusive Behavior

The speaker introduces the bystander approach to gender violence prevention, which focuses on the role of individuals who are not directly involved in abusive situations. He defines a bystander as anyone who is not a perpetrator or a victim and emphasizes the importance of bystanders intervening to challenge abusive behavior. The speaker encourages men to interrupt each other when they see sexist, degrading, or harassing comments, comparing it to how people should respond to racist or homophobic remarks. He argues that changing peer culture and social norms is crucial for reducing abuse and that men who act out in sexist ways should lose status as a result. The speaker also highlights the need for adult men with power to take responsibility for leading on these issues, rather than leaving it to young men or boys.

15:05

🏛️ Leadership and Accountability in Addressing Gender Violence

The speaker concludes by stressing the importance of leadership in addressing gender violence. He criticizes the notion of sensitivity training, arguing that what is needed is leadership training. The speaker believes that leaders in positions of power, such as athletic directors and university presidents, should prioritize and mandate domestic and sexual violence prevention training. He uses the Penn State scandal as an example of the failure of men in leadership positions to protect children. The speaker calls for men to break their complicit silence and challenge each other, standing with women and not against them. He emphasizes the responsibility of men to future generations, urging men to act with courage, strength, and moral integrity to create a culture where abusive behavior is not tolerated.

Keywords

💡Gender Violence

Gender violence refers to various forms of violence perpetrated on the basis of gender, including sexual assault, domestic violence, and sexual harassment. In the video, the speaker argues that these issues have traditionally been framed as 'women's issues,' but he challenges this notion, asserting that they are fundamentally men's issues due to the role of male perpetrators.

💡Paradigm Shift

A paradigm shift denotes a fundamental change in approach or underlying assumptions. The speaker introduces the concept to describe the necessary change in perspective regarding gender violence, moving away from viewing it solely as a women's issue to acknowledging it as a men's issue that requires male involvement and responsibility.

💡Bystander

In the context of the video, a bystander is defined as anyone who is not directly involved as a perpetrator or victim in a situation of abuse. The speaker discusses the 'bystander approach' to prevention, which encourages individuals to take action against abusive behaviors they witness, rather than remaining silent and complicit.

💡Victim-Blaming

Victim-blaming is the act of holding the victim of a crime or wrongdoing responsible for their own harm. The script points out that this is a pervasive issue in discussions of gender violence, where questions about the victim's actions often overshadow the perpetrator's responsibility, as seen in the societal tendency to question what a woman was wearing or doing at the time of an assault.

💡Dominant Group

The dominant group refers to the social group that holds the most power or influence within a society. The speaker uses the term to illustrate how the issues of gender violence are often framed in a way that overlooks the role of the dominant group—men—instead of challenging their behavior and examining their contribution to the problem.

💡Cognitive Structure

Cognitive structure pertains to the way individuals process and categorize information. The video discusses how society's cognitive structure is often set up to blame victims rather than perpetrators, which unconsciously influences the types of questions people ask and the focus of societal discussions around gender violence.

💡Sexist Language

Sexist language involves using words or phrases that are demeaning or discriminatory towards a particular gender. The speaker calls for men to challenge each other when they use such language, as a means of promoting a culture where sexist and abusive behaviors are not tolerated.

💡Leadership

Leadership in the video is discussed as the responsibility of those in positions of power to guide and influence societal change. The speaker argues that the solution to gender violence requires leadership training, not just sensitivity training, emphasizing the need for those in authority to actively prioritize and address these issues.

💡Institutional Roles

The term refers to the part played by various societal institutions, such as religious organizations, sports culture, and family structures, in shaping behaviors and attitudes. The script questions the role of these institutions in producing abusive men and suggests that they need to be part of the solution.

💡Moral Integrity

Moral integrity implies having a strong set of ethical principles and the courage to uphold them. The speaker encourages men to act with moral integrity by challenging each other's behavior and standing against gender violence, rather than remaining silent.

💡Peer Culture

Peer culture refers to the shared attitudes, behaviors, and values within a group of people who are of similar age or social standing. The video highlights the importance of changing peer culture to one where abusive behavior is not tolerated or condoned, which requires the active participation of all members of the group.

Highlights

The speaker challenges the conventional framing of gender violence issues as solely women's issues, arguing that they are primarily men's issues.

Men often tune out discussions on 'women's issues', which inadvertently gives them an excuse to avoid engagement on gender violence.

The term 'gender' is often misunderstood as synonymous with 'women', which contributes to the marginalization of men's roles in gender violence discussions.

The speaker uses an analogy involving race and sexual orientation to illustrate the common oversight of the dominant group in discussions of identity issues.

An exercise using sentence structure demonstrates how language can shift focus away from the perpetrator in domestic violence scenarios.

The concept of victim-blaming is critiqued, with an emphasis on the need to question the actions of the perpetrator rather than the victim.

The speaker calls for a shift in questioning to focus on the reasons behind men's violent behavior, rather than on the women affected.

A call to examine the role of societal institutions in producing abusive men and the systemic nature of gender violence.

The speaker introduces the 'bystander approach' to gender-violence prevention, emphasizing the role of non-perpetrators and non-victims in addressing violence.

The importance of men challenging other men's sexist behaviors in social settings as a means to change peer culture and attitudes.

The bystander approach aims to create a social environment where abusive behavior is not tolerated due to peer pressure and social norms.

The speaker discusses the impact of male silence on the perpetuation of gender violence and the necessity of breaking that silence.

A critique of the term 'sensitivity training', advocating instead for 'leadership training' to address issues of gender violence among men in positions of power.

The need for men with power to take responsibility for leading on issues of gender violence and to challenge the status quo.

The speaker highlights the importance of men's leadership in preventing future generations from experiencing the tragedies associated with gender violence.

A call to action for men to have the courage to challenge each other and to stand with women in the fight against gender violence.

Transcripts

Translator: Joseph Geni Reviewer: Morton Bast

I'm going to share with you a paradigm-shifting perspective

on the issues of gender violence: sexual assault, domestic violence,

relationship abuse, sexual harassment, sexual abuse of children.

That whole range of issues

that I'll refer to in shorthand as "gender violence issues,"

they've been seen as women's issues that some good men help out with,

but I have a problem with that frame and I don't accept it.

I don't see these as women's issues that some good men help out with.

In fact, I'm going to argue that these are men's issues,

first and foremost.

Now obviously --

(Applause)

Obviously, they're also women's issues, so I appreciate that,

but calling gender violence a women's issue is part of the problem,

for a number of reasons.

The first is that it gives men an excuse not to pay attention, right?

A lot of men hear the term "women's issues"

and we tend to tune it out, and we think,

"I'm a guy; that's for the girls," or "that's for the women."

And a lot of men literally don't get beyond the first sentence as a result.

It's almost like a chip in our brain is activated,

and the neural pathways take our attention in a different direction

when we hear the term "women's issues."

This is also true, by the way, of the word "gender,"

because a lot of people hear the word "gender"

and they think it means "women."

So they think that gender issues is synonymous with women's issues.

There's some confusion about the term gender.

And let me illustrate that confusion by way of analogy.

So let's talk for a moment about race.

In the US, when we hear the word "race,"

a lot of people think that means African-American,

Latino, Asian-American, Native American,

South Asian, Pacific Islander, on and on.

A lot of people, when they hear the word "sexual orientation"

think it means gay, lesbian, bisexual.

And a lot of people, when they hear the word "gender,"

think it means women.

In each case, the dominant group doesn't get paid attention to.

As if white people don't have some sort of racial identity

or belong to some racial category or construct,

as if heterosexual people don't have a sexual orientation,

as if men don't have a gender.

This is one of the ways that dominant systems maintain and reproduce themselves,

which is to say the dominant group is rarely challenged

to even think about its dominance,

because that's one of the key characteristics of power and privilege,

the ability to go unexamined,

lacking introspection, in fact being rendered invisible, in large measure,

in the discourse about issues that are primarily about us.

And this is amazing how this works in domestic and sexual violence,

how men have been largely erased from so much of the conversation

about a subject that is centrally about men.

And I'm going to illustrate what I'm talking about

by using the old tech.

I'm old school on some fundamental regards.

I make films and I work with high tech,

but I'm still old school as an educator,

and I want to share with you this exercise

that illustrates on the sentence-structure level

how the way that we think, literally the way that we use language,

conspires to keep our attention off of men.

This is about domestic violence in particular,

but you can plug in other analogues.

This comes from the work of the feminist linguist Julia Penelope.

It starts with a very basic English sentence:

"John beat Mary."

That's a good English sentence.

John is the subject, beat is the verb, Mary is the object, good sentence.

Now we're going to move to the second sentence,

which says the same thing in the passive voice.

"Mary was beaten by John."

And now a whole lot has happened in one sentence.

We've gone from "John beat Mary"

to "Mary was beaten by John."

We've shifted our focus in one sentence from John to Mary,

and you can see John is very close to the end of the sentence,

well, close to dropping off the map of our psychic plain.

The third sentence, John is dropped,

and we have, "Mary was beaten,"

and now it's all about Mary.

We're not even thinking about John, it's totally focused on Mary.

Over the past generation,

the term we've used synonymous with "beaten" is "battered,"

so we have "Mary was battered."

And the final sentence in this sequence, flowing from the others, is,

"Mary is a battered woman."

So now Mary's very identity -- Mary is a battered woman --

is what was done to her by John in the first instance.

But we've demonstrated that John has long ago left the conversation.

Those of us who work in the domestic and sexual violence field

know that victim-blaming is pervasive in this realm,

which is to say, blaming the person to whom something was done

rather than the person who did it.

And we say: why do they go out with these men?

Why are they attracted to them? Why do they keep going back?

What was she wearing at that party? What a stupid thing to do.

Why was she drinking with those guys in that hotel room?

This is victim blaming, and there are many reasons for it,

but one is that our cognitive structure is set up to blame victims.

This is all unconscious.

Our whole cognitive structure is set up to ask questions

about women and women's choices and what they're doing, thinking, wearing.

And I'm not going to shout down people who ask questions about women.

It's a legitimate thing to ask.

But's let's be clear: Asking questions about Mary

is not going to get us anywhere in terms of preventing violence.

We have to ask a different set of questions.

The questions are not about Mary, they're about John.

They include things like, why does John beat Mary?

Why is domestic violence still a big problem in the US and all over the world?

What's going on? Why do so many men abuse physically,

emotionally, verbally, and other ways,

the women and girls, and the men and boys, that they claim to love?

What's going on with men?

Why do so many adult men sexually abuse little girls and boys?

Why is that a common problem in our society

and all over the world today?

Why do we hear over and over again

about new scandals erupting in major institutions

like the Catholic Church or the Penn State football program

or the Boy Scouts of America, on and on and on?

And then local communities all over the country

and all over the world.

We hear about it all the time.

The sexual abuse of children.

What's going on with men? Why do so many men rape women

in our society and around the world?

Why do so many men rape other men?

What is going on with men?

And then what is the role of the various institutions in our society

that are helping to produce abusive men at pandemic rates?

Because this isn't about individual perpetrators.

That's a naive way to understanding what is a much deeper

and more systematic social problem.

The perpetrators aren't these monsters who crawl out of the swamp

and come into town and do their nasty business

and then retreat into the darkness.

That's a very naive notion, right?

Perpetrators are much more normal than that, and everyday than that.

So the question is, what are we doing here in our society and in the world?

What are the roles of various institutions

in helping to produce abusive men?

What's the role of religious belief systems,

the sports culture, the pornography culture,

the family structure, economics, and how that intersects,

and race and ethnicity and how that intersects?

How does all this work?

And then, once we start making those kinds of connections

and asking those important and big questions,

then we can talk about how we can be transformative,

in other words, how can we do something differently?

How can we change the practices?

How can we change the socialization of boys

and the definitions of manhood that lead to these current outcomes?

These are the kind of questions that we need to be asking

and the kind of work that we need to be doing,

but if we're endlessly focused on what women are doing and thinking

in relationships or elsewhere,

we're not going to get to that piece.

I understand that a lot of women

who have been trying to speak out about these issues,

today and yesterday and for years and years,

often get shouted down for their efforts.

They get called nasty names like "male-basher" and "man-hater,"

and the disgusting and offensive "feminazi", right?

And you know what all this is about?

It's called kill the messenger.

It's because the women who are standing up

and speaking out for themselves and for other women

as well as for men and boys,

it's a statement to them to sit down and shut up,

keep the current system in place,

because we don't like it when people rock the boat.

We don't like it when people challenge our power.

You'd better sit down and shut up, basically.

And thank goodness that women haven't done that.

Thank goodness that we live in a world

where there's so much women's leadership that can counteract that.

But one of the powerful roles that men can play in this work

is that we can say some things that sometimes women can't say,

or, better yet, we can be heard saying some things

that women often can't be heard saying.

Now, I appreciate that that's a problem, it's sexism, but it's the truth.

So one of the things that I say to men,

and my colleagues and I always say this,

is we need more men who have the courage and the strength

to start standing up and saying some of this stuff,

and standing with women and not against them

and pretending that somehow this is a battle between the sexes

and other kinds of nonsense.

We live in the world together.

And by the way, one of the things that really bothers me

about some of the rhetoric against feminists and others

who have built the battered women's and rape crisis movements around the world

is that somehow, like I said, that they're anti-male.

What about all the boys who are profoundly affected in a negative way

by what some adult man is doing against their mother, themselves, their sisters?

What about all those boys?

What about all the young men and boys

who have been traumatized by adult men's violence?

You know what?

The same system that produces men who abuse women,

produces men who abuse other men.

And if we want to talk about male victims, let's talk about male victims.

Most male victims of violence are the victims of other men's violence.

So that's something that both women and men have in common.

We are both victims of men's violence.

So we have it in our direct self-interest,

not to mention the fact that most men that I know

have women and girls that we care deeply about,

in our families and our friendship circles and every other way.

So there's so many reasons why we need men to speak out.

It seems obvious saying it out loud, doesn't it?

Now, the nature of the work that I do and my colleagues do

in the sports culture and the US military, in schools,

we pioneered this approach called the bystander approach

to gender-violence prevention.

And I just want to give you the highlights of the bystander approach,

because it's a big thematic shift,

although there's lots of particulars,

but the heart of it is, instead of seeing men as perpetrators

and women as victims,

or women as perpetrators, men as victims,

or any combination in there.

I'm using the gender binary.

I know there's more than men and women, there's more than male and female.

And there are women who are perpetrators,

and of course there are men who are victims.

There's a whole spectrum.

But instead of seeing it in the binary fashion,

we focus on all of us as what we call bystanders,

and a bystander is defined as anybody who is not a perpetrator or a victim

in a given situation,

so in other words friends, teammates, colleagues, coworkers, family members,

those of us who are not directly involved in a dyad of abuse,

but we are embedded in social, family, work, school,

and other peer culture relationships

with people who might be in that situation.

What do we do? How do we speak up? How do we challenge our friends?

How do we support our friends?

But how do we not remain silent in the face of abuse?

Now, when it comes to men and male culture,

the goal is to get men who are not abusive to challenge men who are.

And when I say abusive, I don't mean just men who are beating women.

We're not just saying a man whose friend is abusing his girlfriend

needs to stop the guy at the moment of attack.

That's a naive way of creating a social change.

It's along a continuum, we're trying to get men to interrupt each other.

So, for example, if you're a guy and you're in a group of guys

playing poker, talking, hanging out, no women present,

and another guy says something sexist or degrading or harassing about women,

instead of laughing along or pretending you didn't hear it,

we need men to say, "Hey, that's not funny.

that could be my sister you're talking about,

and could you joke about something else?

Or could you talk about something else?

I don't appreciate that kind of talk."

Just like if you're a white person

and another white person makes a racist comment, you'd hope, I hope,

that white people would interrupt that racist enactment

by a fellow white person.

Just like with heterosexism, if you're a heterosexual person

and you yourself don't enact harassing or abusive behaviors

towards people of varying sexual orientations,

if you don't say something in the face of other heterosexual people doing that,

then, in a sense, isn't your silence a form of consent and complicity?

Well, the bystander approach is trying to give people tools

to interrupt that process and to speak up and to create a peer culture climate

where the abusive behavior will be seen as unacceptable,

not just because it's illegal, but because it's wrong

and unacceptable in the peer culture.

And if we can get to the place where men

who act out in sexist ways will lose status,

young men and boys who act out in sexist

and harassing ways towards girls and women,

as well as towards other boys and men,

will lose status as a result of it, guess what?

We'll see a radical diminution of the abuse.

Because the typical perpetrator is not sick and twisted.

He's a normal guy in every other way, isn't he?

Now, among the many great things that Martin Luther King

said in his short life was,

"In the end, what will hurt the most is not the words of our enemies

but the silence of our friends."

In the end, what will hurt the most is not the words of our enemies

but the silence of our friends.

There's been an awful lot of silence in male culture

about this ongoing tragedy of men's violence

against women and children, hasn't there?

There's been an awful lot of silence.

And all I'm saying is that we need to break that silence,

and we need more men to do that.

Now, it's easier said than done,

because I'm saying it now,

but I'm telling you it's not easy in male culture

for guys to challenge each other,

which is one of the reasons

why part of the paradigm shift that has to happen

is not just understanding these issues as men's issues,

but they're also leadership issues for men.

Because ultimately, the responsibility for taking a stand on these issues

should not fall on the shoulders of little boys

or teenage boys in high school or college men.

It should be on adult men with power.

Adult men with power are the ones we need to be holding accountable

for being leaders on these issues,

because when somebody speaks up in a peer culture

and challenges and interrupts,

he or she is being a leader, really.

But on a big scale, we need more adult men with power

to start prioritizing these issues,

and we haven't seen that yet, have we?

Now, I was at a dinner a number of years ago,

and I work extensively with the US military, all the services.

And I was at this dinner and this woman said to me --

I think she thought she was a little clever --

she said, "So how long have you been doing sensitivity training with the Marines?"

And I said, "With all due respect,

I don't do sensitivity training with the Marines.

I run a leadership program in the Marine Corps."

Now, I know it's a bit pompous, my response,

but it's an important distinction,

because I don't believe that what we need is sensitivity training.

We need leadership training, because, for example,

when a professional coach or a manager of a baseball team or a football team --

and I work extensively in that realm as well --

makes a sexist comment, makes a homophobic statement,

makes a racist comment,

there will be discussions on the sports blogs and in sports talk radio.

And some people will say, "He needs sensitivity training."

Other people will say, "Well, get off it.

That's political correctness run amok,

he made a stupid statement, move on."

My argument is, he doesn't need sensitivity training.

He needs leadership training,

because he's being a bad leader,

because in a society with gender diversity and sexual diversity --

(Applause)

and racial and ethnic diversity,

you make those kind of comments, you're failing at your leadership.

If we can make this point that I'm making

to powerful men and women in our society

at all levels of institutional authority and power,

it's going to change the paradigm of people's thinking.

You know, for example,

I work a lot in college and university athletics

throughout North America.

We know so much about how to prevent domestic and sexual violence, right?

There's no excuse for a college or university

to not have domestic and sexual violence prevention training

mandated for all student athletes, coaches, administrators,

as part of their educational process.

We know enough to know that we can easily do that.

But you know what's missing? The leadership.

But it's not the leadership of student athletes.

It's the leadership of the athletic director,

the president of the university, the people in charge

who make decisions about resources

and who make decisions about priorities in the institutional settings.

That's a failure, in most cases, of men's leadership.

Look at Penn State.

Penn State is the mother of all teachable moments for the bystander approach.

You had so many situations in that realm

where men in powerful positions failed to act

to protect children, in this case, boys.

It's unbelievable, really.

But when you get into it, you realize there are pressures on men.

There are constraints within peer cultures on men,

which is why we need to encourage men to break through those pressures.

And one of the ways to do that is to say

there's an awful lot of men who care deeply about these issues.

I know this, I work with men,

and I've been working with tens of thousands,

hundreds of thousands of men for many decades now.

It's scary, when you think about it, how many years.

But there's so many men who care deeply about these issues,

but caring deeply is not enough.

We need more men with the guts,

with the courage, with the strength, with the moral integrity

to break our complicit silence and challenge each other

and stand with women and not against them.

By the way, we owe it to women.

There's no question about it.

But we also owe it to our sons.

We also owe it to young men who are growing up all over the world

in situations where they didn't make the choice

to be a man in a culture that tells them that manhood is a certain way.

They didn't make the choice.

We that have a choice, have an opportunity and a responsibility to them as well.

I hope that, going forward, men and women,

working together, can begin the change

and the transformation that will happen

so that future generations won't have the level of tragedy

that we deal with on a daily basis.

I know we can do it, we can do better.

Thank you very much.