Who are we not allowed to criticize?

[Grandmaster Jogurt]

Are you not reading the thread?

Less than one percent of criminal accusations of rape by men are found to be false.

Meanwhile, only a few percent of rapes committed by men ever lead to punishment.

The chance of rapists going free because of societal biases is immeasurably higher than the chance of someone suffering real consequences from a false accusation.

But I guess we should sacrifice every last bit for the odd chance of one man getting in trouble he shouldn't have right? Who cares how many rapes go unpunished and more women get raped if it keeps one innocent man out of harm's way! Because the ratio's in the triple digits at least here.

[PainRack]

Are you not reading the thread?

Less than one percent of criminal accusations of rape by men are found to be false.

Meanwhile, only a few percent of rapes committed by men ever lead to punishment.

The chance of rapists going free because of societal biases is immeasurably higher than the chance of someone suffering real consequences from a false accusation.

But I guess we should sacrifice every last bit for the odd chance of one man getting in trouble he shouldn't have right? Who cares how many rapes go unpunished and more women get raped if it keeps one innocent man out of harm's way! Because the ratio's in the triple digits at least here.

Again. Are you not reading my specific complaint?

My specific complaint was regarding this statement.
If, however, you're one of those "I'm not actively malicious, so I'm good and deserve things" people, then you'll react to this uncomfortable truth by denying that it is truth or that it should be an issue at all, since you're putting your discomfort over being seen as a threat over the feelings of those whom your presence threatens.


I honestly feel a much more constructive approach isn't to induce guilt in decent people that yes, we should be treated like rapists because there is so much rape going on.

Its ethically wrong, because it endorses a gender stereotype, one that gender equality was meant to neutralise.

Its also does no practical good because just what good is there in inducing people to accept that yes, we should be treated like rapists?

[Grandmaster Jogurt]

Maybe I could hope that people would use the discomfort as a springboard to actually look into the prevalence of acceptance of sexual assault in our culture from top to bottom, and how the majority of people who sexually assault people don't even consider their actions to be rape?

If we made sure to assuage everyone and don't worry it's only the BAD MANS who do it, guess who's going to go "oh ok then not me?" All those people who actually do rape but don't realise or admit it. Wow that certainly solves things!

Fixing societal situations is never going to be comfortable. Demanding it cater to your comfort as a privileged person makes you part of the problem.

[PainRack]

Maybe I could hope that people would use the discomfort as a springboard to actually look into the prevalence of acceptance of sexual assault in our culture from top to bottom, and how the majority of people who sexually assault people don't even consider their actions to be rape?

If we made sure to assuage everyone and don't worry it's only the BAD MANS who do it, guess who's going to go "oh ok then not me?" All those people who actually do rape but don't realise or admit it. Wow that certainly solves things!

Fixing societal situations is never going to be comfortable. Demanding it cater to your comfort as a privileged person makes you part of the problem.

Should men feel disturbed that women have to fear men are rapists?

That is acceptable.

However. Just WHY should men be made to feel like that they're potential rapists?

You're claiming that men demanding that society cater to our comfort ignores the ethical point being discussed here. If I was to claim that in order to destroy nazism, we must remove free speech and democracy so as to mobilise the nation for war, is this an acceptable ethical trade off?

This even though one of the goals of destroying nazism was to make the world safe for democracy?

Do you see the similarity here? In a world where feminism are requesting for gender equality, you, in the goal of trying to prevent rape and etc, are demanding that we demolish gender equality, so that women can achieve gender equality........

[Terralthra]

PainRack, have you ever read an essay entitled "Schrödinger's Rapist"?

UEST BLOGGER STARLING: SCHRÖDINGER’S RAPIST: OR A GUY’S GUIDE TO APPROACHING STRANGE WOMEN WITHOUT BEING MACED
Posted on October 8, 2009 by Sweet Machine
1,216
Phaedra Starling is the pen name of a romance novelist and licensed private investigator living in small New York City apartment with two large dogs. She practices Brazilian jiu-jitsu and makes world-class apricot muffins.

Gentlemen. Thank you for reading.

Let me start out by assuring you that I understand you are a good sort of person. You are kind to children and animals. You respect the elderly. You donate to charity. You tell jokes without laughing at your own punchlines. You respect women. You like women. In fact, you would really like to have a mutually respectful and loving sexual relationship with a woman. Unfortunately, you don’t yet know that woman—she isn’t working with you, nor have you been introduced through mutual friends or drawn to the same activities. So you must look further afield to encounter her.

So far, so good. Miss LonelyHearts, your humble instructor, approves. Human connection, love, romance: there is nothing wrong with these yearnings.

Now, you want to become acquainted with a woman you see in public. The first thing you need to understand is that women are dealing with a set of challenges and concerns that are strange to you, a man. To begin with, we would rather not be killed or otherwise violently assaulted.

“But wait! I don’t want that, either!”

Well, no. But do you think about it all the time? Is preventing violent assault or murder part of your daily routine, rather than merely something you do when you venture into war zones? Because, for women, it is. When I go on a date, I always leave the man’s full name and contact information written next to my computer monitor. This is so the cops can find my body if I go missing. My best friend will call or e-mail me the next morning, and I must answer that call or e-mail before noon-ish, or she begins to worry. If she doesn’t hear from me by three or so, she’ll call the police. My activities after dark are curtailed. Unless I am in a densely-occupied, well-lit space, I won’t go out alone. Even then, I prefer to have a friend or two, or my dogs, with me. Do you follow rules like these?

So when you, a stranger, approach me, I have to ask myself: Will this man rape me?

Do you think I’m overreacting? One in every six American women will be sexually assaulted in her lifetime. I bet you don’t think you know any rapists, but consider the sheer number of rapes that must occur. These rapes are not all committed by Phillip Garrido, Brian David Mitchell, or other members of the Brotherhood of Scary Hair and Homemade Religion. While you may assume that none of the men you know are rapists, I can assure you that at least one is. Consider: if every rapist commits an average of ten rapes (a horrifying number, isn’t it?) then the concentration of rapists in the population is still a little over one in sixty. That means four in my graduating class in high school. One among my coworkers. One in the subway car at rush hour. Eleven who work out at my gym. How do I know that you, the nice guy who wants nothing more than companionship and True Love, are not this rapist?

I don’t.

When you approach me in public, you are Schrödinger’s Rapist. You may or may not be a man who would commit rape. I won’t know for sure unless you start sexually assaulting me. I can’t see inside your head, and I don’t know your intentions. If you expect me to trust you—to accept you at face value as a nice sort of guy—you are not only failing to respect my reasonable caution, you are being cavalier about my personal safety.

Fortunately, you’re a good guy. We’ve already established that. Now that you’re aware that there’s a problem, you are going to go out of your way to fix it, and to make the women with whom you interact feel as safe as possible.

To begin with, you must accept that I set my own risk tolerance. When you approach me, I will begin to evaluate the possibility you will do me harm. That possibility is never 0%. For some women, particularly women who have been victims of violent assaults, any level of risk is unacceptable. Those women do not want to be approached, no matter how nice you are or how much you’d like to date them. Okay? That’s their right. Don’t get pissy about it. Women are under no obligation to hear the sales pitch before deciding they are not in the market to buy.

The second important point: you must be aware of what signals you are sending by your appearance and the environment. We are going to be paying close attention to your appearance and behavior and matching those signs to our idea of a threat.

This means that some men should never approach strange women in public. Specifically, if you have truly unusual standards of personal cleanliness, if you are the prophet of your own religion, or if you have tattoos of gang symbols or Technicolor cockroaches all over your face and neck, you are just never going to get a good response approaching a woman cold. That doesn’t mean you’re doomed to a life of solitude, but I suggest you start with internet dating, where you can put your unusual traits out there and find a woman who will appreciate them.

Are you wearing a tee-shirt making a rape joke? NOT A GOOD CHOICE—not in general, and definitely not when approaching a strange woman.

Pay attention to the environment. Look around. Are you in a dark alley? Then probably you ought not approach a woman and try to strike up a conversation. The same applies if you are alone with a woman in most public places. If the public place is a closed area (a subway car, an elevator, a bus), even a crowded one, you may not realize that the woman’s ability to flee in case of threat is limited. Ask yourself, “If I were dangerous, would this woman be safe in this space with me?” If the answer is no, then it isn’t appropriate to approach her.

On the other hand, if you are both at church accompanied by your mothers, who are lifelong best friends, the woman is as close as it comes to safe. That is to say, still not 100% safe. But the odds are pretty good.

The third point: Women are communicating all the time. Learn to understand and respect women’s communication to you.

You want to say Hi to the cute girl on the subway. How will she react? Fortunately, I can tell you with some certainty, because she’s already sending messages to you. Looking out the window, reading a book, working on a computer, arms folded across chest, body away from you = do not disturb. So, y’know, don’t disturb her. Really. Even to say that you like her hair, shoes, or book. A compliment is not always a reason for women to smile and say thank you. You are a threat, remember? You are Schrödinger’s Rapist. Don’t assume that whatever you have to say will win her over with charm or flattery. Believe what she’s signaling, and back off.

If you speak, and she responds in a monosyllabic way without looking at you, she’s saying, “I don’t want to be rude, but please leave me alone.” You don’t know why. It could be “Please leave me alone because I am trying to memorize Beowulf.” It could be “Please leave me alone because you are a scary, scary man with breath like a water buffalo.” It could be “Please leave me alone because I am planning my assassination of a major geopolitical figure and I will have to kill you if you are able to recognize me and blow my cover.”

On the other hand, if she is turned towards you, making eye contact, and she responds in a friendly and talkative manner when you speak to her, you are getting a green light. You can continue the conversation until you start getting signals to back off.

The fourth point: If you fail to respect what women say, you label yourself a problem.

There’s a man with whom I went out on a single date—afternoon coffee, for one hour by the clock—on July 25th. In the two days after the date, he sent me about fifteen e-mails, scolding me for non-responsiveness. I e-mailed him back, saying, “Look, this is a disproportionate response to a single date. You are making me uncomfortable. Do not contact me again.” It is now October 7th. Does he still e-mail?

Yeah. He does. About every two weeks.

This man scores higher on the threat level scale than Man with the Cockroach Tattoos. (Who, after all, is guilty of nothing more than terrifying bad taste.) You see, Mr. E-mail has made it clear that he ignores what I say when he wants something from me. Now, I don’t know if he is an actual rapist, and I sincerely hope he’s not. But he is certainly Schrödinger’s Rapist, and this particular Schrödinger’s Rapist has a probability ratio greater than one in sixty. Because a man who ignores a woman’s NO in a non-sexual setting is more likely to ignore NO in a sexual setting, as well.

So if you speak to a woman who is otherwise occupied, you’re sending a subtle message. It is that your desire to interact trumps her right to be left alone. If you pursue a conversation when she’s tried to cut it off, you send a message. It is that your desire to speak trumps her right to be left alone. And each of those messages indicates that you believe your desires are a legitimate reason to override her rights.

For women, who are watching you very closely to determine how much of a threat you are, this is an important piece of data.

The fifth and last point: Don’t rape. Nor should you commit these similar but less severe offenses: don’t assault. Don’t grope. Don’t constrain. Don’t brandish. Don’t expose yourself. Don’t threaten with physical violence. Don’t threaten with sexual violence.

Shouldn’t this go without saying? Of course it should. Sadly, that’s not the world I live in. You may be beginning to realize that it’s not the world you live in, either.

Miss LonelyHearts wishes you happiness and success in your search for romantic companionship.

(emphasis in orig.)

Maybe it will be illuminating. Women don't treat all men like they're rapists; they treat all men as if they might be rapists, because they might be.

[Grandmaster Jogurt]

The way to fix the issue of rape is to make it so rapists stop raping.

The only way to do that is to simultaneously have people who are often victims have their own defense mechanisms as well as letting the people who can do something about it know that it's an issue.

The only ways to make men not uncomfortable with the idea people might think they could rape are to a: fix society such that the defense mechanism isn't needed anymore or b: shut up people so the problem isn't made apparent.

So instead of asking people to stop saying these things that make you uncomfortable, why not go the other path and put some effort into fixing the world such that that bad impression isn't needed in the first place?

[Eleas]

Except that I'm not talking about Watson, which is why I explictly pointed out that I'm sidetracking the discussion. I'm talking about Grandmaster Jogurt reaction and attitude, namely, that women have to deal with men being potential rapists and more importantly, that men SHOULD feel uncomfortable that women view men as rapists.

And I'm pointing out that it's part and parcel of the same thing. Women have to deal with men being potential rapists, and this is a structure which pervades our culture. We have a privileged position which should give cause for us to be uncomfortable.

HOWEVER, just as men are NOT allowed to stereotype women, women SHOULDN"T be allowed to stereotype men. So why SHOULDN"T I feel uncomfortable about being stereotyped as a rapist?

Except you're not being stereotyped as a rapist. You're being stereotyped as an unknown potentially threatening person in certain specific situations. If I were an Arabic-looking man passing through an American airport, for instance, I would "stereotype" security in much the same way. That doesn't mean I would treat them badly, but it does mean I would be careful in how to deal with them, in order to minimize a potentially harmful situation.

Again. If I was to stereotype women as being a slut, is this acceptable? If not, why the fuck is it acceptable to stereotype me as a rapist?

Because the one is a condemnation meant to evoke social sanction on someone's sexuality for no good god-damn reason, while the other one (though misrepresented, since no-one is commonly stereotyping men as actual rapists but as dangerous unknowns) rests on a desire to not be assaulted.

Because my only opinion on Watson was that it was an overreaction that turned bad rapidly, when all the woman was saying that this guy action creeped me out.

I, too, am saying this guy's action creeps me the fuck out, because you don't cross all those lines without noticing unless you don't place very much importance in respecting boundaries in the first place, i.e. trifles like personal space, the ability to say no without coercion, etc. If I get on the bus wearing a big heavy bag that smacks people in the face every time I turn around, that may be just an unfortunate accident. If I keep smacking people in the face as soon as I turn around and never feel it's my problem, guess what? Still my problem.

[Formless]

Except you're not being stereotyped as a rapist. You're being stereotyped as an unknown potentially threatening person in certain specific situations. If I were an Arabic-looking man passing through an American airport, for instance, I would "stereotype" security in much the same way. That doesn't mean I would treat them badly, but it does mean I would be careful in how to deal with them, in order to minimize a potentially harmful situation.

Another analogy might be fearing a mugger or a thief when you notice someone apparently following you in a public place, especially at night. That's a gender and race neutral situation where anyone would feel similarly.

Basically, saying that all men are potential rapists is true, insofar as it should be a no brainer. All people are potential thieves, murderers, abusers, torturers, hostage takers, spies, hackers, suicides, bullies, arsonists, gossips, drunks, kidnappers, and any number of other neer do wells that you can think of. At least, they are as long as they remain strangers. Its only once you get to know them that you personally can start ruling out possibilities. Its the unknown condition that is important and should be stressed here. I'll even say that a woman acting similarly could set off the same alarm bells, though rape might not be what you would worry about as its an unusually lopsided crime that way. But there are other kinds of sexual misconduct out there that could make the situation uncomfortable.

I do understand where you are coming from, Painrack, as I have seen feminists and feminist arguments that rest on an unfair assumption that all men are perverts who can't keep it in their pants or stop obsessing about their dicks (or which sound that way because of poor rhetoric). That would be directly similar to stereotyping women as sluts, but that's not what is going on here. Besides which, its not a unique stereotype to feminists, so I won't blame them too harshly for it; one could argue that our culture outright encourages that idea, especially among men. Sex sells, and all that.

[PainRack]

I note that the two of you are not addressing the specific portion of my complaint.

Again, men actions creepy? Not my complaint. women wanting to defend themselves by treating certain situations as potential to get raped? Regrettable but common sense.

Jotrun, I say again, Jotrun dimissal of Purple opinion because men should feel uncomfortable, because to feel otherwise is us men denying the scope of rape to assauge our feelings
I can feel disgusted at rapists, understand women concerns, all without subscribing to men should be treated like rapists because there so much rape, and if they uncomfortable, they deny scope of rape
What I uncomfortable with is Jotrun gender stereotype n I can protest this stereotype without ignoring rape and its effects.


Since we are telling stories, Liu Qian and Liu Bei were once patrolling the city when Liu Qian exclaimed:" Arrest that man! He's a rapist!" After the arrest, Liu Bei asked, "How did you know?" Qian replied," He had not raped anyone my lord, but he had the tools to do so."

The moral of the story was that not considering intent leads to blind injustice, a satiric assault on Bei decision to imprison anyone with wine making tools to have violated his ban on wine making, but the morality of injustice through blind stereotypes remains true here.

[Terralthra]

I'm having trouble parsing your post.

[Eleas]

I note that the two of you are not addressing the specific portion of my complaint.

I note that you're full of shit. I did address it.

Again, men actions creepy? Not my complaint. women wanting to defend themselves by treating certain situations as potential to get raped? Regrettable but common sense.

Then what is the problem? The specific tone of the argument? Because that again leads to the unfortunate notion of having to coddle people.

Jotrun, I say again, Jotrun dimissal of Purple opinion because men should feel uncomfortable, because to feel otherwise is us men denying the scope of rape to assauge our feelings
I can feel disgusted at rapists, understand women concerns, all without subscribing to men should be treated like rapists because there so much rape, and if they uncomfortable, they deny scope of rape
What I uncomfortable with is Jotrun gender stereotype n I can protest this stereotype without ignoring rape and its effects.

There is no person called Jotrun in this thread. Furthermore, I myself agreed with the sentiment that we should feel uncomfortable with something perpetrated by men because men are encouraged and sanctioned in that sort of behavior. Again, in defiance of your obstinate refusal to read it, that does not mean men are treated as rapists.

Since we are telling stories,

We are not telling stories as far as I can tell. The analogies I gave were only useful insofar as they would illuminate the absurdity of your position, and it seems they did that well enough that you ignored my points more or less entirely.

[Purple]

There is no person called Jotrun in this thread. Furthermore, I myself agreed with the sentiment that we should feel uncomfortable with something perpetrated by men because men are encouraged and sanctioned in that sort of behavior. Again, in defiance of your obstinate refusal to read it, that does not mean men are treated as rapists.

Just to nitpick. Not all men are. Only a certain subset of American males. The mindset is very much alien to the rest of us. Especially those of us who are not American and have no lasting contact with the very strange culture that exists there in regard to pretty much anything. So for the rest of us the feeling is not really that close to home.

[Eleas]

Just to nitpick. Not all men are. Only a certain subset of American males. The mindset is very much alien to the rest of us. Especially those of us who are not American and have no lasting contact with the very strange culture that exists there in regard to pretty much anything. So for the rest of us the feeling is not really that close to home.

Really? So, then, there's no space made for you in narratives as the traditionally masculine role, and people don't make excuses for such behavior from you compared to others? It happens all the time where I am, in, supposedly, one of the most equal (in terms of gender balance) places on the planet. So I can't help but wonder if you even know what gender roles and structures are and how they operate.

[Thanas]

Aside from the rape issues - which I think we agree upon - It is very hard for me to keep a straight face whenever feminists claim to be for the abolishment of gender roles while also defending the current divorce laws which favor mothers over fathers by default.

[Eleas]

I can understand why, particularly when such lopsided divorce laws only serve to stratify the caregiver role as being "woman's work."

[PainRack]

Damn autocorrect, I should have learnt never to post from mobile.


Again. To reiterate, neither Jogurt or Eleas has addressed my specific complaint. I specifically stated that this was a sidetrack discussion because its DIFFERENT from the topic.

Have you even tried to understand why many men will find it uncomfortable to find out that a major political activist feels that way? And even if it is not. Have you even tried to understand why many men will find it uncomfortable to hear such stories that sound just believable enough?

If men find it uncomfortable, that's good. The prevalence of sexual assault and what constitutes it are things that many men don't know about or are in active denial of. Learning that many women are uneasy with your presence because they understand you could be a threat to without even realising it probably is going to be uncomfortable, but imagine how it feels to those of us who have to live with that uneasiness.

If you really are a "decent person", you'll react to learning about this uncomfortable fact by trying to understand how those affected feel and what you can do to make it better. If, however, you're one of those "I'm not actively malicious, so I'm good and deserve things" people, then you'll react to this uncomfortable truth by denying that it is truth or that it should be an issue at all, since you're putting your discomfort over being seen as a threat over the feelings of those whom your presence threatens.

Jogurt here is making the point that well, men SHOULD be uncomfortable, because they need to realise that women have to view men as potential threats in any situation.

However, in the course of making this point, she has made her own gender stereotype, one that she herself noted is present. And its wrong. Two wrongs, do NOT make a right Eleas.

You wanna claim that women need to protect themselves by viewing potential threats? Again. No complaints from me. Its the same as me planning fire safety escape route everytime I stay in a hotel.

Men should note that some actions creep women out, and out of common courtesy and decency, seek to understand why women feel this way and refrain from doing it? AGAIN. Not my complaint. Hell, I endorse this action utterly.

HOWEVER, I REFUSE to endorse Jogurt stance that men SHOULD accept the gender stereotype that they are potential rapists, because in Jogurt point, and I REPEAT,

then you'll react to this uncomfortable truth by denying that it is truth or that it should be an issue at all, since you're putting your discomfort over being seen as a threat over the feelings of those whom your presence threatens

That's BULLSHIT.

I can PERFECTLY empathise with women on the fear of being raped, WITHOUT having to accept the gender stereotype of men are rapists. It is NOT morally right to say that in the cause of gender equality, we must protect women from being raped, by denying men gender equality, by stereotyping them as rapists.

Hell. Slutwalk itself campaigned specifically on how sexual stereotypes DO not justify rape. Just why is it now acceptable that sexual stereotypes must be endorsed to protect women from being raped? I say again. I can perfectly understand why women feel uncomfortable in certain situations, I can endorse women actions to protect themselves from being raped, to distance themselves from potential threats, I can and will change and educate other men to understand why and not do stuff that creep women out........... ALL without having to accept the gender stereotype that men are all potential rapists.

Eleas. You NEED to understand this.

I'm not SAYING that men shouldn't feel uncomfortable about the fact that women are raped or that women must rate threats. I'm highlight Jogurt blind spot, that in her drive to protect women, she is prosecuting an INJUSTICE, by protraying a gender stereotype that men are rapists.


But of course. Keep saying that women like Watsons are not saying men are rapists. Which was never my point.

Keep saying that women need to protect themselves, which was never my rebuttal.

My rebuttal was to Jogurt dictating that men MUST accept the gender stereotype that they are potential rapists, because otherwise, they will never be able to empathise with women fears of being raped. Bullshit. I don't have to accept the stereotype that drug addicts have screwed up lives to understand why addiction is a problem in their lives. I can perfectly act to prevent rape, I can perfectly act to prevent myself from acting in a position that threaten a woman sense of security WITHOUT having to accept the fact that I must view myself as a potential rapist, that I must accept this gender stereotype.


And since I repeated this 3 times in my post, since I repeated this stance 3 times already in the thread, if you choose to ignore the fact that Jotrun HAS committed such a gender stereotype, then I decline to further participate in the thread.

[Simon_Jester]

It would be interesting if there were a way to actually study whether children on average get better outcomes with the mother or with the father, controlling for other variables.

If this were studied, I would not be surprised to learn that "he's a bad father" is itself a fairly common cause of divorce, perhaps even more common than "she's a bad mother." In which case it would stand to reason that divorce courts would tend to favor mothers.

I would also not be surprised to learn that there was no functional difference, and that incompetent parenthood is evenly distributed across both sexes of divorcees.

Jogurt here is making the point that well, men SHOULD be uncomfortable, because they need to realise that women have to view men as potential threats in any situation.

However, in the course of making this point, she has made her own gender stereotype, one that she herself noted is present. And its wrong. Two wrongs, do NOT make a right Eleas.

You wanna claim that women need to protect themselves by viewing potential threats? Again. No complaints from me. Its the same as me planning fire safety escape route everytime I stay in a hotel.

Men should note that some actions creep women out, and out of common courtesy and decency, seek to understand why women feel this way and refrain from doing it? AGAIN. Not my complaint. Hell, I endorse this action utterly.

HOWEVER, I REFUSE to endorse Jogurt stance that men SHOULD accept the gender stereotype that they are potential rapists, because in Jogurt point, and I REPEAT,

then you'll react to this uncomfortable truth by denying that it is truth or that it should be an issue at all, since you're putting your discomfort over being seen as a threat over the feelings of those whom your presence threatens

That's BULLSHIT.

I can PERFECTLY empathise with women on the fear of being raped, WITHOUT having to accept the gender stereotype of men are rapists. It is NOT morally right to say that in the cause of gender equality, we must protect women from being raped, by denying men gender equality, by stereotyping them as rapists.

The problem is that while "men are rapists" is false, "rapists are men" is basically true. If you're a heterosexual woman- you are in effectively no danger of being raped by a female. Even lesbians probably aren't in that much danger of being raped by a female, while probably being in about as much danger of rape by males as all the other women.

Everyone involved in this problem is starting from the same fact- and it's not a stereotype, it's just a fact.

Given who is getting hurt here, and getting hurt more, I think it very wise and sensible that we focus on getting the "women are afraid of being raped by hostile men, or by men who won't take no for an answer on a date" problem, rather than the "men are being stereotyped as rapists when 82 plus or minus 8 percent of them are not."

[percentages are made up]

[Thanas]

It would be interesting if there were a way to actually study whether children on average get better outcomes with the mother or with the father, controlling for other variables.

If this were studied, I would not be surprised to learn that "he's a bad father" is itself a fairly common cause of divorce, perhaps even more common than "she's a bad mother." In which case it would stand to reason that divorce courts would tend to favor mothers.

The determination as it stands right now is that the father has to prove that the mother is not a good mother and that he would be a better one. Mothers don't have to do anything to show the opposite unless challenges are made. And in some cases, feminists were in favor of continually duping the father into paying child support by arguing in favor of DNA tests being made illegal.

[Grandmaster Jogurt]

Aside from the rape issues - which I think we agree upon - It is very hard for me to keep a straight face whenever feminists claim to be for the abolishment of gender roles while also defending the current divorce laws which favor mothers over fathers by default.

1: Since when do feminists defend this (please do not use MRAs as a source)
2: Assuming you're talking about child custody, it favouring women is actually a myth (in America at least, dunno about Germany), and if you're talking about alimony, while there's room to improve that definitely, as a concept it's not too far off so long as the wage gap is a thing.

[Eleas]

Again. To reiterate, neither Jogurt or Eleas has addressed my specific complaint. I specifically stated that this was a sidetrack discussion because its DIFFERENT from the topic.

*patient sigh* Yes, I know. And still, you remain wrong, because I have in fact addressed it, and it is you who fail to understand.

HOWEVER, I REFUSE to endorse Jogurt stance that men SHOULD accept the gender stereotype that they are potential rapists,

...way I see it, this is (and I hope Joghurt can weigh in on this) not what Jogurt is actually saying but a strawman thereof. S/he doesn't advocate acceptance of the stereotype itself as being valid: surely you're not actually suggesting that Jogurt feels men should consider themselves to be rapists? Should identify with being rapists? Should prefer to rape?

Obviously not. That would be completely counterproductive as well as ludicrous. We want men very much to consider themselves not rapists, and in fact work at cross purposes with people who rape. But of the fact that men are viewed as potential rapists is something that we do have to accept, just as white people as beneficiaries of white privilege do indeed have to accept unconscious participation in a structure whose ultimate expression is racist. And hence the argument that when people say that men are potential rapists, they do so because the stereotype is accurate to their situation. It does not make you a potential rapist, period. It makes you a potential rapist to a woman walking home alone, for instance.

It is NOT morally right to say that in the cause of gender equality, we must protect women from being raped, by denying men gender equality, by stereotyping them as rapists.

That strawman is getting a bit worn.

ALL without having to accept the gender stereotype that men are all potential rapists.

Make that very worn.

Eleas. You NEED to understand this.

I do. I'm still waiting for the light to go on at your end.

I'm not SAYING that men shouldn't feel uncomfortable about the fact that women are raped or that women must rate threats. I'm highlight Jogurt blind spot, that in her drive to protect women, she is prosecuting an INJUSTICE, by protraying a gender stereotype that men are rapists.

And threadbare.

But of course. Keep saying that women like Watsons are not saying men are rapists. Which was never my point.

Keep saying that women need to protect themselves, which was never my rebuttal.

...

My rebuttal was to Jogurt dictating that men MUST accept the gender stereotype that they are potential rapists, because otherwise, they will never be able to empathise with women fears of being raped.

Which is still, as far as I can tell, your own unique reading of Joghurt's point, a reading that makes zero internal sense but allows you to project self-righteous outrage.

Bullshit. I don't have to accept the stereotype that drug addicts have screwed up lives to understand why addiction is a problem in their lives. I can perfectly act to prevent rape, I can perfectly act to prevent myself from acting in a position that threaten a woman sense of security WITHOUT having to accept the fact that I must view myself as a potential rapist, that I must accept this gender stereotype.

...

And since I repeated this 3 times in my post, since I repeated this stance 3 times already in the thread, if you choose to ignore the fact that Jotrun HAS committed such a gender stereotype, then I decline to further participate in the thread.

If you actually want to participate, then I suggest removing your blinkers before re-reading the thread.

[Thanas]

1: Since when do feminists defend this (please do not use MRAs as a source)
2: Assuming you're talking about child custody, it favouring women is actually a myth (in America at least, dunno about Germany), and if you're talking about alimony, while there's room to improve that definitely, as a concept it's not too far off so long as the wage gap is a thing.

Up until the constitutional court, use of DNA tests in Germany were illegal without consent of the mother, unless the father completely abandoned the child beforehand. As to the defenders, it happened years ago and in Germany so no English language source.

BTW, wtf is MRA?

Custody is what I am talking about in Germany. With regards to alimony, the law is equal there so no problems afaik.

[Grandmaster Jogurt]

MRA stands for men's rights activism, but it usually boils down to men suppressing discussion of rape and talking about how feminism's gone too are and it's men who are oppressed.

Painrack, here is something you should read.

[PainRack]

*patient sigh* Yes, I know. And still, you remain wrong, because I have in fact addressed it, and it is you who fail to understand.

Just HOW have you addressed it? Your last three posts essentially boil down to, PainRack, you need to understand that women need to protect themselves.

Guess what? I KNOW that. I have NO PROBLEMS with it.

My PROBLEM, is with Jogurt statement that men must accept the gender stereotype of men are potential rapists.

...way I see it, this is (and I hope Joghurt can weigh in on this) not what Jogurt is actually saying but a strawman thereof. S/he doesn't advocate acceptance of the stereotype itself as being valid: surely you're not actually suggesting that Jogurt feels men should consider themselves to be rapists? Should identify with being rapists? Should prefer to rape?

If that's not what she saying, then please clarify. Because her reply to Purple? It sounds very much like it.

Purple says that men aren't willing to view themselves as rapists and are uncomfortable with the idea, Jogurt says well, men SHOULD feel uncomfortable.

Because in her opinion, "I'm not actively malicious, so I'm good and deserve things" people", in other words, people who DON"T think they're rapists, well, they can't possibly empathise with a woman concerns.

If that is not her intent, then clarify it.

And stop it with the "Men don't hate women, but they're part of the system" crap. Note that I'm NOT saying women shouldn't be able to speak out against the system, I'm not saying that the system is good, I'm not saying that injustice isn't present. I'm saying that you don't fix a wrong, by creating another wrong.

I'm saying that Jogurt statement is uncomfortable to me. Not because I deny rape is present. But because of its corollary. That men must accept the stereotype that they're potential rapists, because denial of this fact means they're incapable of empathasing with women concerns.

But when the typical reaction to that discomfort is to deny that it should even exist rather than acknowledge why there's so much of a discomfort on our end that that discomfort is affecting you and do things to try to fix it, that's a bad thing.

Again, I can do things to try to fix it, even as I'm uncomfortable that this exists, and more importantly, don't feel that it SHOULD be directed at me. And that this reaction from women itself can be disproportionate and inappropriate.

And please don't brush this off as of nothing inconsequential either. Jogurt defence by bringing up false rape accusations ignore the gravity of the situation. Its not just false rape accusations that tell the hurt this stereotype bring.

False child sex accusations? SRA?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_alle ... xual_abuse
The results of this stereotype.

Preventing adults from playing a game of soccer with kids and talking to kids?
Again, a result of this stereotype.

Preventing fathers from seeing their kids?
http://www.familylawexpress.com.au/news ... says/1762/

Allegations of child sexual abuse are being increasingly invented by mothers to stop fathers from seeing their children, says a retiring Family Court judge.

Justice David Collier, retiring from Parramatta Family Court at the end of the month after 14 years on the bench, sees unprecedented hostility infiltrating the Family Court, and a willingness by parents to use their children to damage one another.

”If a husband and wife really get down to it in this day and age, dirt flies,” Justice Collier said.

The worst are those mothers who direct false allegations of abuse against former partners.

”When you have heard the evidence, you realise that this is a person who’s so determined to win that he or she will say anything. I’m satisfied that a number of people who have appeared before me have known that it is one of the ways of completely shutting husbands out of the child’s life.

”It’s a horrible weapon.”

Oops. Again, another result of this stereotype.


Blackened reputation? AGAIN, another result of this stereotype.
But hey, I guess my personal anecdote don't count. Newspaper reports of men who were falsely accused of molest and rape? They don't count. A growing tendency in Commonwealth countries of false molest and abuse, fostered by financial or personal incentives? They don't count.

Because only the American experience of false rape statistics, the American campus culture of rape, that the only thing that matters. In an era of gender equality, the goal of feminism, only America rape culture counts, not the Commonwealth nations where harm is being done by this stereotype.

Unlike MRA organisations, I don't think any...... dedicated action needs to be taken other than that needed for gender equality(for example, reworking child support laws to include women as the financial caregiver if the man is the custodian in divorce laws). I don't think that this stereotype is significant that advocacy, outside of gender equality needs to be taken. But to ignore that this stereotype doesn't exist and doesn't hurt people? Bullshit.

[PainRack]

MRA stands for men's rights activism, but it usually boils down to men suppressing discussion of rape and talking about how feminism's gone too are and it's men who are oppressed.

Painrack, here is something you should read.

Here's something you should read.

You can choose, as a man, to help create a fairer world for women – and for men, too. You can choose to challenge misogyny and sexual violence wherever you see them.

A fairer world, does NOT include one where gender stereotypes of men being rapists is present. Rape prevention by "be careful who you go out with, make sure someone knows where you're going if you're out on a date, be aware of your surroundings and where person is taking you, be aware of potentially compromising situations" does NOT mean that gender stereotypes that all men are potential rapists is needed.

[Grandmaster Jogurt]

The fact that you put the onus of rape prevention entirely on women indicates a problem that I'm not sure you're even remotely on the verge of comprehending.