|Effacing the Male: Language is used to vanish male victims|

**Effacing the Male** - How Language is used to make male victims vanish from view|
|:------:|
In 2001, Adam Jones Ph.D. explained how the use of language made male victims in wartime, humanitarian disasters and in every day life. He identified Three main uses of language that make male victims less relevant, irrelevant and not even present.|
**"Incidentalizing"**. Modern news, as noted, is a hierarchical creature. It generally "leads" with the dominant theme of the article, which the headline is also meant to convey. Many newspapers, printing or reprinting an article or wire-service report, will include only (a version of) the headline and the first several paragraphs of the story. Thus, to relegate an important theme to passing mention in the middle reaches of the article, or to introduce it only at the end, is effectively to render it incidental and inconspicuous, if not outright invisible. Mentioning them existence of male victims, often the majority, below the fold makes them vanish|
**"Displacement"**. Here, the male is defined by some trait or label other than gender -- even when gender obviously, or apparently, is decisive in shaping the experience or predicament being described. Use of the terms Victim, Dead, People, Villagers and similar group nouns hide male victims. A real world example is "106 Villagers Killed, Including a Grandmother" *Izghe, Borno State - Boko Haram*.|
**"Exclusion"**. The trope most commonly adopted here can be summarized in the little-examined phrase, "including women" -- or, equally commonly, "including women and children." The trend has been persistently evident in media coverage of the Bosnian war, the terrorism of Boko Haram/Islamic State and NGO/UN reporting.|
*[Jones, Adam. "Effacing the male: gender, misrepresentation, and exclusion in the Kosovo war." Jones, Gender Exclusive: Essays on violence, men, and feminist international relations (2001).](http://www.webcitation.org/6pTIyAA4l)*|