Anyone can be subject to violence that deeply impacts their life and ability to function in society. However, approaches to ending violence in education often focus solely or majorly on violence against women and girls. There are of course extremely valid reasons for this – women and girls are often subjected to gender-based violence at rates higher than those suffered by men and boys. That of course does not mean that society should not pay attention to the violence based-issues of men and boys though.

Australian Senator David Leyonhjelm is arguing just that. Recently, in a high school in Sydney, male students were asked to stand and take a White Ribbon Oath. The oath essentially has them pledge that they will work to speak out and prevent men’s violence against women. The male students complaint was on the fact that female students did not have to take any sort of oath and were able to remain seated during the exercise. Senator Leyonhjelm feels that this is a sort of gender-based discrimination as it centers the violence committed by men and boys towards women and girls without at all accounting for violence men and boys face at various hands (Buzzfeed).

The United Kingdom is taking a different approach to violence and education. They are going the more traditional route and focusing on gender-based violence related to women and girls by increasing their aid and stepping up efforts to tackle gender-based violence in 30 countries (ReliefWeb).

I see a few problems with the UK’s approach. Did any communities or governments in these countries ask for increased aid, development, or projects? Why does the UK seem to be ignoring violence against men and boys? What conditionality’s are going to come with this increased money?

When it comes to tacking violence in education, I am inclined to agree with Senator Leyonhjelm, countries, development agencies, and communities have to take a multi-faceted approach to the issue. That means not letting anyone – no matter their gender-identity off the hook. It also means understanding local customs and traditions before just throwing money at a problem. It means that aid should not come with conditions if its true purpose is to “help”. And it means that foreign governments and communities should not get to decide for a country or group of people what violence does and does not look like in their society. There should be an oath for everyone. Human rights may be universal, but they should still allow for some nuance.

Sources: http://reliefweb.int/report/world/new-support-boosts-britain-s-lead-global-drive-tackle-violence-against-girls-and-women

https://www.buzzfeed.com/aliceworkman/white-ribbon-oath-shaming?utm_term=.uqVDo16Pg#.xvzqXYeP5

Image Source: http://www.chitaskforce.org/