Who are we not allowed to criticize?

SLAM: debunk creationism, pseudoscience, and superstitions. Discuss logic and morality.

Moderator: Alyrium Denryle

User avatar
Purple
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 5233
Joined: 2010-04-20 08:31am
Location: In a purple cube orbiting this planet. Hijacking satellites for an internet connection.

Re: Who are we not allowed to criticize?

Post by Purple »

Grandmaster Jogurt wrote:No. No they aren't. Rapists come from all social groups, not just the evil jocks or poor people or whatever groups you list as "undesirables". Nerds on web forums who spend their time watching ponies and anime and love video games? A not insignificant portion of them are rapists, or would do it if the chance came.
There is also an undesirable population among the nerd culture. There are those of us who play as paladins and those who play as 13 year old sex-ninja girls. But again, there exists this sense of them being them. Bolded for a reason. I am not sure how I can get this across. I am not sure it can be explained. I am not sure it even makes cognitive sense any more.
Be happy you're like this, then. There's a lot of people who balk at the idea of avoiding having sex with someone who's too intoxicated to consent. And they're everywhere. I argued with dozens on Space Battles. There's probably a bunch here.
Oh I know. I just don't get them.
There are other things, too. A lot of people don't consider it rape if the victim doesn't actively resist and fight back, or if she doesn't say no, or if she's saying yes while obviously under duress, or sometimes even if she's ever had casual sex before, or any other things where consent is obviously not there but they're unable to fathom the importance of it outside of their own perspective.
Reading this I get the feeling that the mindset needed for such a viewpoint actually means that said person is just rationalizing. Is that it?

This said. I would like to see if said study has ever been repeated or done outside of university campus situations. If for nothing else than completeness sake.
It has become clear to me in the previous days that any attempts at reconciliation and explanation with the community here has failed. I have tried my best. I really have. I pored my heart out trying. But it was all for nothing.

You win. There, I have said it.

Now there is only one thing left to do. Let us see if I can sum up the strength needed to end things once and for all.
User avatar
Thanas
Magister
Magister
Posts: 30779
Joined: 2004-06-26 07:49pm

Re: Who are we not allowed to criticize?

Post by Thanas »

I think the whole US campus culture per se is pretty unhealthy and focused way too much on sex. See the whole institution of Spring Break, which is unheard of in Germany - sure you know you are gonna get wasted and have sex on holidays, but there is no real need and focus on having sex. It is just something you do when having fun, not the goal of Spring break itself.

It doesn't surprise me at all that when you put kids in those situations of "must have sex now" and then add alcohol, drugs and the whole culture to it that there are such a high number of rapes and abuse.
Whoever says "education does not matter" can try ignorance
------------
A decision must be made in the life of every nation at the very moment when the grasp of the enemy is at its throat. Then, it seems that the only way to survive is to use the means of the enemy, to rest survival upon what is expedient, to look the other way. Well, the answer to that is 'survival as what'? A country isn't a rock. It's not an extension of one's self. It's what it stands for. It's what it stands for when standing for something is the most difficult! - Chief Judge Haywood
------------
My LPs
Andrew_Fireborn
Jedi Knight
Posts: 799
Joined: 2007-02-12 06:50am

Re: Who are we not allowed to criticize?

Post by Andrew_Fireborn »

Thanas wrote:Or, to be blunt, do not stick your dick into drunk woman who have not made their intentions clear before.
Solid advice, that should be more widely adhered.

Sadly, barring the complete and absolute removal of Alcohol from existence it will continue to happen.

Another option, would be for sex to cease being a cultural status icon. Equally unlikely as even feminists will dismiss men and claim they'll "never getting any."

Frankly, in this area, we're trying to cut legal edges with inherently grey swaths of human interaction.

To tie this tangent to the original topic, can anyone from Norway verify this? It's been the new big thing I've seen floating around, but I've no idea if this is the Nordic equivalent of the Daily Sun or Fox News.
Rule one of Existance: Never, under any circumstances, underestimate stupidity. As it will still find ways to surprise you.
User avatar
Purple
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 5233
Joined: 2010-04-20 08:31am
Location: In a purple cube orbiting this planet. Hijacking satellites for an internet connection.

Re: Who are we not allowed to criticize?

Post by Purple »

Thanas wrote:I think the whole US campus culture per se is pretty unhealthy and focused way too much on sex. See the whole institution of Spring Break, which is unheard of in Germany - sure you know you are gonna get wasted and have sex on holidays, but there is no real need and focus on having sex. It is just something you do when having fun, not the goal of Spring break itself.
It's not just Germany. The whole thing is unheard off here as well.
Thanas wrote:It doesn't surprise me at all that when you put kids in those situations of "must have sex now" and then add alcohol, drugs and the whole culture to it that there are such a high number of rapes and abuse.
Don't forget collective housing and very little else to do other than study and party. Add to that the whole culture that revolves around sports and how athletes seem to get into colleges on account of their athletic abilities even thou they are often not college material otherwise. And it's begging for trouble. And not just in the immediate sense. This would likely have repercussions in the long term on the mindset of the population as they grow older.

I mean no offense to anyone with this. But is it wrong if I feel happy for not being an American right now? :wtf:
Andrew_Fireborn wrote:Another option, would be for sex to cease being a cultural status icon. Equally unlikely as even feminists will dismiss men and claim they'll "never getting any."
Strangely enough this as Thanas has said seems to be a uniquely American thing.
It has become clear to me in the previous days that any attempts at reconciliation and explanation with the community here has failed. I have tried my best. I really have. I pored my heart out trying. But it was all for nothing.

You win. There, I have said it.

Now there is only one thing left to do. Let us see if I can sum up the strength needed to end things once and for all.
Grandmaster Jogurt
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 1725
Joined: 2004-12-16 04:01am

Re: Who are we not allowed to criticize?

Post by Grandmaster Jogurt »

Thanas wrote:I really doubt that. Look to the most famous movement to combat oppression, the movement to abolish slavery. It needed a lot of criticisms from realists before it got political clout.
I'm not sure how much abolition can be used as a similar example since the people oppressed by slavery were so oppressed they weren't even considered people in an explicit sense. However, if we do run with it, here's the thing: wouldn't abolition have been a lot easier to come around if society ran by the rule of giving a lot of heed to the words of those oppressed by slavery? In the same way, racial relations in America can't be bettered if you give the weight of the dominant majority equal weight as those who are oppressed and a minority. There's the double weighting there of white people being the majority and white voices being the ones given weight in public discourse that means even an "even playing field" ends up weighted in favour of the status quo.
Who do you regard as a good female fiction writer? Because in my experience I have seen a lot of bad jobs, not necessarily limited to gender.
Man, I dunno; I wasn't expecting being put on the spot :L

All my favourite comic writers are women, with Shimura Takako as an example just to my side over here. I haven't read a book in my adult life written by a woman that writes men more poorly than women, but for the other way around it's kind of a crapshoot. I mean even to my knowledge, the manic pixie dream girl cliché comes entirely from male writers. To take this away from just my personal experience, George R R Martin is often praised for actually writing good, developed female characters despite being an old white guy. This shouldn't be something that deserves praise but a baseline necessity for being a decent author.
I get that but I think it is a bit problematic. How do you expect men to ask you out then? Now granted, I'm not Don Juan so my experiences may not be authoritative, but it seems to me the problem is that almost any situation where women are being asked out can turn ugly, or that anytime you ask someone you know out in private is such a situation. Does that make it fair to characterize everyone as a potential rapist? I think this is what purple was getting at (though maybe he expressed himself badly) when he used the parallel to black men.

Now, as to this, Is someone knowing your room number when asking you out a problem per se? I don't think so, because that would mean acquintances should never ever ask each other out.
The parallel to racial profiling is just stinking by its nature, not because of any failure of Purple to express himself. First on a quantitative level, since the odds of a woman being assaulted by a man in America are vastly higher than the odds of a white person being assaulted by a person of colour. Second on a qualitative level, because look at the way they turn out. If men are "profiled" by women who then become cautious around them, how does this affect men? They might miss out on some chances for friendship or sex because of a false positive, or they may feel uncomfortable when considering how their presence can make others feel. How does it work for people of colour profiled because of their race? All of that, plus discrimination in employment, and housing, and being arrested more often, and being sentenced harder, and being victims of vigilante justice, and being harrassed by police, and so on. People die from it.

They're not comparable and for a white guy to use the discrimination against people of colour as a tool for his own gain is always terrible.

As for propositioning, it's not an all or nothing deal. Greater care just needs to be taken on the part of (usually) men to understand the context of the situation, their body language, and how these things can be perceived. I mean, this is a benefit to both ways: not only would a widespread change here make women more comfortable, but they'd make these specific women more comfortable around you. Everyone's happier.

I say "usually" there because it's not clearly divided across gender. I'm a tall woman, and I have to take care of how my body language is coming across with, say, my partner who's a head shorter than I, just as much as I'm definitely conscious of the body language of men one and a half times my size.

For your other point here, I'll link something that says it all better than I could try to in this post.
Purple wrote:There is also an undesirable population among the nerd culture. There are those of us who play as paladins and those who play as 13 year old sex-ninja girls. But again, there exists this sense of them being them. Bolded for a reason. I am not sure how I can get this across. I am not sure it can be explained. I am not sure it even makes cognitive sense any more.
Otherising people who have blatant issues is a bad thing to do, because it much more easily lets one get complacent about one's own issues. The people who are quick to jump up against white supremacy but think the current system would be just fine if only people didn't talk about race so much are part of the problem, and by otherising racism as something other, bad people do, it makes it all the easier for them to stick in their own bigotry without understanding it's even there.
Reading this I get the feeling that the mindset needed for such a viewpoint actually means that said person is just rationalizing. Is that it?

This said. I would like to see if said study has ever been repeated or done outside of university campus situations. If for nothing else than completeness sake.
Rationalising is part of it, but, in the case of rape most especially, for some people it just comes from an incapacity to care about things from anyone's perspective but their own. Thus you have people who try to set up rules they can try to follow which, if they do, will get them clear of any responsibility for rape. This, instead of, you know, actually trying to figure out what things they would do would be rape and not do them because they would be hurting the other party. They're seeing it from their own perspective only and refuse to look outside it.

As for studies outside of college, there's a bunch that show people who have or who would rape in large numbers. I don't have them on hand (I just happened to read that one about colleges a couple days ago) though.

And don't try to think it's just an American thing. This is rife everywhere. Using America, or, as many do, Saudi Arabia or Afghanistan or whatever as examples of REAL sexism and otherising it going along the same pattern of complacency.

Also, for anyone who said that people were jumping the gun about Andrew_Fireborn being an MRA, I leave you his further posts in this thread.
User avatar
PeZook
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 13237
Joined: 2002-07-18 06:08pm
Location: Poland

Re: Who are we not allowed to criticize?

Post by PeZook »

Thanas wrote: I was talking about Jogurt, not Watson. I don't know her nor her comments, but really, the whole thing does not seem to be a big deal.
Take it for what you will, but it pushed all the "sleazy" buttons for me. It's not just the elevator setting, it's also the time (4 A.M.) and the place he wanted to "talk" (his hotel room).

I don't know why, maybe it's my upbringing or maybe it's my recently acquired feminism, but if I wanted to talk with Rebecca Watson (or any woman I admired, really) so badly, I'd have waited until the elevator stopped and the door opened and invited her to the hotel bar the next day, rather than my room at 4 A.M.

And it wasn't that big a deal, no, just a small example of what not to do. Watson wasn't hysterical about it, either - it's the internet that turned it into a total shitfest, calling her crazy, shrill, hypocritical, etc.
Image
JULY 20TH 1969 - The day the entire world was looking up

It suddenly struck me that that tiny pea, pretty and blue, was the Earth. I put up my thumb and shut one eye, and my thumb blotted out the planet Earth. I didn't feel like a giant. I felt very, very small.
- NEIL ARMSTRONG, MISSION COMMANDER, APOLLO 11

Signature dedicated to the greatest achievement of mankind.

MILDLY DERANGED PHYSICIST does not mind BREAKING the SOUND BARRIER, because it is INSURED. - Simon_Jester considering the problems of hypersonic flight for Team L.A.M.E.
User avatar
Purple
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 5233
Joined: 2010-04-20 08:31am
Location: In a purple cube orbiting this planet. Hijacking satellites for an internet connection.

Re: Who are we not allowed to criticize?

Post by Purple »

Grandmaster Jogurt wrote:The parallel to racial profiling is just stinking by its nature, not because of any failure of Purple to express himself. First on a quantitative level, since the odds of a woman being assaulted by a man in America are vastly higher than the odds of a white person being assaulted by a person of colour. Second on a qualitative level, because look at the way they turn out. If men are "profiled" by women who then become cautious around them, how does this affect men? They might miss out on some chances for friendship or sex because of a false positive, or they may feel uncomfortable when considering how their presence can make others feel. How does it work for people of colour profiled because of their race? All of that, plus discrimination in employment, and housing, and being arrested more often, and being sentenced harder, and being victims of vigilante justice, and being harrassed by police, and so on. People die from it.

They're not comparable and for a white guy to use the discrimination against people of colour as a tool for his own gain is always terrible.
Honestly the issue with the comparison is scale, not form. Simply put the mechanism for both is absolutely the same. It's just that the severity of the effects is different. And regardless of the results you can see how for a honest and decent person from the profiled group it can appear distasteful to be profiled for the actions of others.
Purple wrote:Otherising people who have blatant issues is a bad thing to do, because it much more easily lets one get complacent about one's own issues. The people who are quick to jump up against white supremacy but think the current system would be just fine if only people didn't talk about race so much are part of the problem, and by otherising racism as something other, bad people do, it makes it all the easier for them to stick in their own bigotry without understanding it's even there.
It's not so much blatant issues as it is... It's hard to explain this. Thanas actually made me think when he mentioned the whole thing about spring break. And I have to say that where I am from such behavior and the mindset that leads to it would be viewed as excessive.
Basically here in Europe we simply do not have the culture of "must have sex" that Thanas mentioned and that you see in American media. The kind of culture that drives people to think that having sex is so important that it is a valid reason to suspend your moral judgment. And that generally makes sex be seen as a status symbol. We just don't. Sex is just not that big a deal. It's not the be all and end all of things. If a friend tells you that he had it last night. The appropriate comment is: "So what?" There is a time and place for such behavior and thoughts to be sure. But it's usually the beginning of high school. After that you are expected to grow out of it and either start dating or become a nerd who dreams about dating.
And don't try to think it's just an American thing. This is rife everywhere. Using America, or, as many do, Saudi Arabia or Afghanistan or whatever as examples of REAL sexism and otherising it going along the same pattern of complacency.
I am not sure that you can forge a pattern by using extremely different examples like that. Unless you want to say that there is something inherent with the average male that drives us to establish rape-patriarchies. Which I do find questionable.
It has become clear to me in the previous days that any attempts at reconciliation and explanation with the community here has failed. I have tried my best. I really have. I pored my heart out trying. But it was all for nothing.

You win. There, I have said it.

Now there is only one thing left to do. Let us see if I can sum up the strength needed to end things once and for all.
User avatar
Terralthra
Requiescat in Pace
Posts: 4741
Joined: 2007-10-05 09:55pm
Location: San Francisco, California, United States

Re: Who are we not allowed to criticize?

Post by Terralthra »

Andrew_Fireborn wrote:See, that amuses me.

By saying intoxicated women can't consent, they're enshrining as law that women are too mentally infirm to be allowed to make poor choices. That they cannot take into account the fact that if they imbibe alcohol they might make choices they'll regret later.

And then, they state that this is the pro-women equality stance.
The law, and most (not all, but the overwhelming majority) of feminists say that an intoxicated person is incapable of consenting to rape. More concretely, a person who is intoxicated is by definition not in their right mind. Consent, as legally defined, requires one to be of sound mind. Alcohol and other intoxicants, threats of force or harm, etc., deny consent, and sex obtained through such is rape.

As for your "unable to find the study," (which is ironic, because I've linked to it on this forum before), it's right here. A sample of 1882 college-aged men on a college campus were offered a survey (without being told it was intended to try to quantify undetected rapists). The survey asked, among other questions, the following four questions:
1. Have you ever been in a situation where you tried, but for various reasons did not succeed, in having sexual intercourse with an adult by using or threatening to use physical force (twisting their arm, holding them down, etc.) if they did not cooperate?
2. Have you ever had sexual intercourse with someone, even though they did no want to, because they were too intoxicated (on alcohol or drugs) to resist your sexual advances (e.g., removing their clothes)?
3. Have you ever had sexual intercourse with an adult when they didn't want to because you used or threatened to use physical force (twisting their arm; holding them down, etc.) if they didn't cooperate?
4. Have you ever had oral sex with an adult when they didn't want to because you used or threatened to use physical force (twisting their arm; holding them down, etc.) if they didn't cooperate?
120 out of 1882 (6%) answered yes to one or more of these questions, indicating they had committed rape, attempted rape, sexual assault, or attempted sexual assault. The majority said yes to #2. Those who answered yes were given another survey attempting to find the number of rapes committed, and the average was 4, though that's somewhat misleading - a minority of those surveyed attempted it once, while a majority (59% or so) had attempted or completed an average of 5.8 rapes each.

Given the methodology of the study, the 12% figure is almost certainly under-reported, as surely some who took the survey consciously or unconsciously realized they were being asked if they'd ever tried to rape someone, and answered no.
User avatar
Thanas
Magister
Magister
Posts: 30779
Joined: 2004-06-26 07:49pm

Re: Who are we not allowed to criticize?

Post by Thanas »

PeZook wrote:
Thanas wrote: I was talking about Jogurt, not Watson. I don't know her nor her comments, but really, the whole thing does not seem to be a big deal.
Take it for what you will, but it pushed all the "sleazy" buttons for me. It's not just the elevator setting, it's also the time (4 A.M.) and the place he wanted to "talk" (his hotel room).

I don't know why, maybe it's my upbringing or maybe it's my recently acquired feminism, but if I wanted to talk with Rebecca Watson (or any woman I admired, really) so badly, I'd have waited until the elevator stopped and the door opened and invited her to the hotel bar the next day, rather than my room at 4 A.M.
I don't know, I wasn't there. Depending on how he did it it could either be incredibly offensive or a case of good intention, bad setting. Just the circumstances alone however aren't that big of a deal.
Grandmaster Jogurt wrote:I'm not sure how much abolition can be used as a similar example since the people oppressed by slavery were so oppressed they weren't even considered people in an explicit sense. However, if we do run with it, here's the thing: wouldn't abolition have been a lot easier to come around if society ran by the rule of giving a lot of heed to the words of those oppressed by slavery? In the same way, racial relations in America can't be bettered if you give the weight of the dominant majority equal weight as those who are oppressed and a minority. There's the double weighting there of white people being the majority and white voices being the ones given weight in public discourse that means even an "even playing field" ends up weighted in favour of the status quo.
The world doesn't work that way and never will. You need to be able to accept outside criticism or you are seen as dangerous fanatics. Case in point over here in Germany - there was a ruling that stated that men have no choice but to pay child support in case of divorce even when their spouses were cheating. This went so far as to deny men the chance to find out if the children who they were paying for were even theirs by ruling DNA tests to be illegal.

Now, I think you can see how this is blatantly unfair. Even worse, all major feminists who managed to get quoted by the newspapers approved this law. Some later changed their tune after criticism. Had they not done that, I could not have supported them. I hope you can see why.
Who do you regard as a good female fiction writer? Because in my experience I have seen a lot of bad jobs, not necessarily limited to gender.
Man, I dunno; I wasn't expecting being put on the spot :L

All my favourite comic writers are women, with Shimura Takako as an example just to my side over here. I haven't read a book in my adult life written by a woman that writes men more poorly than women, but for the other way around it's kind of a crapshoot. I mean even to my knowledge, the manic pixie dream girl cliché comes entirely from male writers. To take this away from just my personal experience, George R R Martin is often praised for actually writing good, developed female characters despite being an old white guy. This shouldn't be something that deserves praise but a baseline necessity for being a decent author.
Meh. I can just as easily name female writers who write absolutely horrid female characters and who enjoy a lot of success. In fact, of the last crap popular authors with horrid female characters the most striking example is female. Twilight, anybody?

So I don't know. Seems like this is related more to talent than to gender.
The parallel to racial profiling is just stinking by its nature, not because of any failure of Purple to express himself. First on a quantitative level, since the odds of a woman being assaulted by a man in America are vastly higher than the odds of a white person being assaulted by a person of colour. Second on a qualitative level, because look at the way they turn out. If men are "profiled" by women who then become cautious around them, how does this affect men? They might miss out on some chances for friendship or sex because of a false positive, or they may feel uncomfortable when considering how their presence can make others feel. How does it work for people of colour profiled because of their race? All of that, plus discrimination in employment, and housing, and being arrested more often, and being sentenced harder, and being victims of vigilante justice, and being harrassed by police, and so on. People die from it.

They're not comparable and for a white guy to use the discrimination against people of colour as a tool for his own gain is always terrible.
Meh. I still say the basic comparison is an apt one because in both cases many are being framed for the sins of a minority.
As for propositioning, it's not an all or nothing deal. Greater care just needs to be taken on the part of (usually) men to understand the context of the situation, their body language, and how these things can be perceived. I mean, this is a benefit to both ways: not only would a widespread change here make women more comfortable, but they'd make these specific women more comfortable around you. Everyone's happier.
Well, except the person who pretty much gets labelled as a potential rapist. Tell any woman that they are a potential [insert bad stereotype here] and I bet they would feel pretty much insulted.
All of that is just common sense.
Whoever says "education does not matter" can try ignorance
------------
A decision must be made in the life of every nation at the very moment when the grasp of the enemy is at its throat. Then, it seems that the only way to survive is to use the means of the enemy, to rest survival upon what is expedient, to look the other way. Well, the answer to that is 'survival as what'? A country isn't a rock. It's not an extension of one's self. It's what it stands for. It's what it stands for when standing for something is the most difficult! - Chief Judge Haywood
------------
My LPs
Andrew_Fireborn
Jedi Knight
Posts: 799
Joined: 2007-02-12 06:50am

Re: Who are we not allowed to criticize?

Post by Andrew_Fireborn »

Terralthra wrote:As for your "unable to find the study," (which is ironic, because I've linked to it on this forum before), it's right here.
Yes, thank you. As I said, my ability to find things has never been good. Doesn't help that the link Jogurt posted cited the study as "Facts about Sexual Assualt," while your PDF lists it as "Repeat Rape and Multiple Offending Among Undetected Rapists."
Rule one of Existance: Never, under any circumstances, underestimate stupidity. As it will still find ways to surprise you.
User avatar
Purple
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 5233
Joined: 2010-04-20 08:31am
Location: In a purple cube orbiting this planet. Hijacking satellites for an internet connection.

Re: Who are we not allowed to criticize?

Post by Purple »

Andrew_Fireborn wrote:
Terralthra wrote:As for your "unable to find the study," (which is ironic, because I've linked to it on this forum before), it's right here.
Yes, thank you. As I said, my ability to find things has never been good. Doesn't help that the link Jogurt posted cited the study as "Facts about Sexual Assualt," while your PDF lists it as "Repeat Rape and Multiple Offending Among Undetected Rapists."
I would just like to add that this kind of thing is completely possible. As I suffer from it as well. There are just some people here who can't find their way around search engines no mater how hard we try. Some times I too can not find things even if I know exactly what I am looking for. Give it a different title and it becomes flat out impossible.
It has become clear to me in the previous days that any attempts at reconciliation and explanation with the community here has failed. I have tried my best. I really have. I pored my heart out trying. But it was all for nothing.

You win. There, I have said it.

Now there is only one thing left to do. Let us see if I can sum up the strength needed to end things once and for all.
User avatar
Terralthra
Requiescat in Pace
Posts: 4741
Joined: 2007-10-05 09:55pm
Location: San Francisco, California, United States

Re: Who are we not allowed to criticize?

Post by Terralthra »

I found it in approximately three clicks after putting into Google "1 in 12 men admit to rape". Don't make excuses about the name of the study.
User avatar
Purple
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 5233
Joined: 2010-04-20 08:31am
Location: In a purple cube orbiting this planet. Hijacking satellites for an internet connection.

Re: Who are we not allowed to criticize?

Post by Purple »

Terralthra wrote:I found it in approximately three clicks after putting into Google "1 in 12 men admit to rape". Don't make excuses about the name of the study.
It's a talent. Some people can just do it and others can't. I for example often have trouble finding songs on youtube when I know all of the following: Artist, album, song name, year of publishing, publisher, genre. And I know people who can find songs just by me whistling them.
It has become clear to me in the previous days that any attempts at reconciliation and explanation with the community here has failed. I have tried my best. I really have. I pored my heart out trying. But it was all for nothing.

You win. There, I have said it.

Now there is only one thing left to do. Let us see if I can sum up the strength needed to end things once and for all.
User avatar
PeZook
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 13237
Joined: 2002-07-18 06:08pm
Location: Poland

Re: Who are we not allowed to criticize?

Post by PeZook »

Thanas wrote: I don't know, I wasn't there. Depending on how he did it it could either be incredibly offensive or a case of good intention, bad setting. Just the circumstances alone however aren't that big of a deal.
The circumstances made her feel uncomfortable, which I can get, and it's really the Internet which made it a big deal when she actually just said "It creeped me out because it was 4 A.M., in a foreign country, in a confined space. Guys, don't do that."

And it spawned a massive response. Including (I shit you not) death and rape threats. A woman complaining publically about behavior that makes her uncomfortable. How dare she.

That vlog of hers was really like me bitching about bad drivers or annoying people in line at a supermarket...except with people saying afterwards that I should be raped.
Image
JULY 20TH 1969 - The day the entire world was looking up

It suddenly struck me that that tiny pea, pretty and blue, was the Earth. I put up my thumb and shut one eye, and my thumb blotted out the planet Earth. I didn't feel like a giant. I felt very, very small.
- NEIL ARMSTRONG, MISSION COMMANDER, APOLLO 11

Signature dedicated to the greatest achievement of mankind.

MILDLY DERANGED PHYSICIST does not mind BREAKING the SOUND BARRIER, because it is INSURED. - Simon_Jester considering the problems of hypersonic flight for Team L.A.M.E.
User avatar
bobalot
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 1731
Joined: 2008-05-21 06:42am
Location: Sydney, Australia
Contact:

Re: Who are we not allowed to criticize?

Post by bobalot »

"Who are we not allowed to criticize?"

The military. Even in Australia, the military-jerk is getting to be a bit much.
"This statement, in its utterly clueless hubristic stupidity, cannot be improved upon. I merely quote it in admiration of its perfection." - Garibaldi

"Problem is, while the Germans have had many mea culpas and quite painfully dealt with their history, the South is still hellbent on painting themselves as the real victims. It gives them a special place in the history of assholes" - Covenant

"Over three million died fighting for the emperor, but when the war was over he pretended it was not his responsibility. What kind of man does that?'' - Saburo Sakai

Join SDN on Discord
Simon_Jester
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 30165
Joined: 2009-05-23 07:29pm

Re: Who are we not allowed to criticize?

Post by Simon_Jester »

Terralthra wrote:120 out of 1882 (6%) answered yes to one or more of these questions, indicating they had committed rape, attempted rape, sexual assault, or attempted sexual assault. The majority said yes to #2. Those who answered yes were given another survey attempting to find the number of rapes committed, and the average was 4, though that's somewhat misleading - a minority of those surveyed attempted it once, while a majority (59% or so) had attempted or completed an average of 5.8 rapes each.

Given the methodology of the study, the 12% figure is almost certainly under-reported, as surely some who took the survey consciously or unconsciously realized they were being asked if they'd ever tried to rape someone, and answered no.
Question: did the followup survey check the number of rapes or the number of victims?
This space dedicated to Vasily Arkhipov
User avatar
Thanas
Magister
Magister
Posts: 30779
Joined: 2004-06-26 07:49pm

Re: Who are we not allowed to criticize?

Post by Thanas »

PeZook wrote:
Thanas wrote: I don't know, I wasn't there. Depending on how he did it it could either be incredibly offensive or a case of good intention, bad setting. Just the circumstances alone however aren't that big of a deal.
The circumstances made her feel uncomfortable, which I can get, and it's really the Internet which made it a big deal when she actually just said "It creeped me out because it was 4 A.M., in a foreign country, in a confined space. Guys, don't do that."

And it spawned a massive response. Including (I shit you not) death and rape threats. A woman complaining publically about behavior that makes her uncomfortable. How dare she.

That vlog of hers was really like me bitching about bad drivers or annoying people in line at a supermarket...except with people saying afterwards that I should be raped.
Yeah, troglodytes. Like I said, I missed or forgot about the whole episode but it goes without saying that death and rape threats are not appropriate at all.
Whoever says "education does not matter" can try ignorance
------------
A decision must be made in the life of every nation at the very moment when the grasp of the enemy is at its throat. Then, it seems that the only way to survive is to use the means of the enemy, to rest survival upon what is expedient, to look the other way. Well, the answer to that is 'survival as what'? A country isn't a rock. It's not an extension of one's self. It's what it stands for. It's what it stands for when standing for something is the most difficult! - Chief Judge Haywood
------------
My LPs
User avatar
PainRack
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7581
Joined: 2002-07-07 03:03am
Location: Singapura

Re: Who are we not allowed to criticize?

Post by PainRack »

Grandmaster Jogurt wrote: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.
To sidetrack the discussion a bit, just WHY shouldn't decent men feel threatened and disturbed that they're viewed as a rapist in an innocent context?

I'm sorry, but the whole context of equality means that both men and women have to give and take, and this includes women understanding why men would talk in a certain manner and not all men are rapists.

Maybe I'm biased, but I did feel extremely hurt when my nursing class accussed me of being a pervert, because apparently, I didn't react when my penis was touched as a classmate walked past(to be honest, I have no recollection of the incident and that shows just how insignificant that event was to me) and my nonchalence attitude towards the penis in nursing practical.

Right. Pardon me for just not being bothered about sexual organs when learning how to put on a urosheath and/or a foley cathether in a vagina.

In my case, my lecturer stood up for me and simply pointed out how inappropiate it was for nursing staff, who would soon seen more gross details to be disturbed at sexual organs or at my nonchalence towards it. And sentences like "put your hands on it" is NOT some form of sexual comment, when its outright stated in the nursing manual to hold the penis shaft while unrolling the urosheath on top.

Seriously. The CLOSEST that I ever came close to a sexual comment was mentioning how this girl looked like someone I tried to date once and that was in some kinda random small talk segment and a throwaway line.
Last edited by PainRack on 2013-08-26 01:22am, edited 1 time in total.
Let him land on any Lyran world to taste firsthand the wrath of peace loving people thwarted by the myopic greed of a few miserly old farts- Katrina Steiner
Grandmaster Jogurt
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 1725
Joined: 2004-12-16 04:01am

Re: Who are we not allowed to criticize?

Post by Grandmaster Jogurt »

We know why you're uncomfortable with the issue.

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.
User avatar
PainRack
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7581
Joined: 2002-07-07 03:03am
Location: Singapura

Re: Who are we not allowed to criticize?

Post by PainRack »

Grandmaster Jogurt wrote:We know why you're uncomfortable with the issue.

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.
I'm sorry. But in this case, the MRAs ARE right.

To use another context, men shouldn't be allowed to randomly call women sluts. Or judge them negatively based on some random perception.

Just why is it now applicable for men?

I won't deny that the Watson event was overblown, but PZ Myers in attempting to defend her was doing just as much blowing up as the MRA attack her.
Let him land on any Lyran world to taste firsthand the wrath of peace loving people thwarted by the myopic greed of a few miserly old farts- Katrina Steiner
User avatar
Terralthra
Requiescat in Pace
Posts: 4741
Joined: 2007-10-05 09:55pm
Location: San Francisco, California, United States

Re: Who are we not allowed to criticize?

Post by Terralthra »

Simon_Jester wrote:
Terralthra wrote:120 out of 1882 (6%) answered yes to one or more of these questions, indicating they had committed rape, attempted rape, sexual assault, or attempted sexual assault. The majority said yes to #2. Those who answered yes were given another survey attempting to find the number of rapes committed, and the average was 4, though that's somewhat misleading - a minority of those surveyed attempted it once, while a majority (59% or so) had attempted or completed an average of 5.8 rapes each.

Given the methodology of the study, the 12% figure is almost certainly under-reported, as surely some who took the survey consciously or unconsciously realized they were being asked if they'd ever tried to rape someone, and answered no.
Question: did the followup survey check the number of rapes or the number of victims?
The Study wrote:Any participant who responded "yes" to one of these questions was asked a series of follow-up questions regarding their age, the victim's age, the number of times it happened, whether it happened with another person, and if so, the frequency of other instances or the number of other victims (this last question varied depending on the version of the API used).
Grandmaster Jogurt
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 1725
Joined: 2004-12-16 04:01am

Re: Who are we not allowed to criticize?

Post by Grandmaster Jogurt »

PainRack wrote:I'm sorry. But in this case, the MRAs ARE right.

To use another context, men shouldn't be allowed to randomly call women sluts. Or judge them negatively based on some random perception.

Just why is it now applicable for men?

I won't deny that the Watson event was overblown, but PZ Myers in attempting to defend her was doing just as much blowing up as the MRA attack her.
What happens if a guy gets a false negative on whether or not a girl is a "slut"? What happens to the guy? Anything?

What happens if a woman gets a false negative on whether or not a guy is a rapist? What happens to the girl? Anything different?

There's a lot more to this, but if you can't even see this much you have some work to do.
User avatar
Eleas
Jaina Dax
Posts: 4896
Joined: 2002-07-08 05:08am
Location: Malmö, Sweden
Contact:

Re: Who are we not allowed to criticize?

Post by Eleas »

PainRack wrote:To sidetrack the discussion a bit, just WHY shouldn't decent men feel threatened and disturbed that they're viewed as a rapist in an innocent context?
You're not sidetracking the discussion, you're derailing the issue. That's a different thing. If a man takes pains to isolate a woman he does not know, at night, in a confined space, and makes an intimate proposition, then he has done a number of things that he did not need to do: he has isolated this woman in a confined space, he has picked a place where they are unlikely to be disturbed, and he has chosen a time where people are less likely to be interrupted. He has done these things. What's she done? Well, heinously, she's had the temerity to note these things and feel worried for her own safety, a worry backed up by statistics.
PainRack wrote:I'm sorry, but the whole context of equality means that both men and women have to give and take, and this includes women understanding why men would talk in a certain manner and not all men are rapists.
No, you know what? Fuck that. It is not incumbent on anyone to put other people's fragile egos before their own bodily safety, not in situations where a moment's simple thought on part of the active participant (the man, in this case) would have sufficed to not create a threatening space and situation in the first place. This notion of a woman having an obligation to put the feelings of others above their own safety is one of the reasons why "no means no" still meets resistance. After all, she should be considerate of his feelings, and he was only kidding around, et cetera.
Björn Paulsen

"Travelers with closed minds can tell us little except about themselves."
--Chinua Achebe
User avatar
PainRack
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7581
Joined: 2002-07-07 03:03am
Location: Singapura

Re: Who are we not allowed to criticize?

Post by PainRack »

Grandmaster Jogurt wrote:What happens if a guy gets a false negative on whether or not a girl is a "slut"? What happens to the guy? Anything?

What happens if a woman gets a false negative on whether or not a guy is a rapist? What happens to the girl? Anything different?

There's a lot more to this, but if you can't even see this much you have some work to do.
I'm sorry. What happens to a guy who gets falsely accussed of being a molestor or a rapist? Because THAT is the angle the men are coming from.

Well, there's settlement out of court.
http://www.divaasia.com/article/6701

Or maybe the huge legal fees, as well as emotional impact of being accused of a child sexual molestor.
http://iwasfalselyaccused.com/my-story/ ... ly-friends


Now, again, I fully understand that this is NOT applicable to Watson. What Watson did was she talked about how feminists were being sexualised and dennigrated at atheist conference, on the way up in an elevator, she felt that another attendence invitation to go to his room for coffee was creepy. She didn't accuse him of being a rapist or a molestor, just doing an action that creeped her out.

And guess what? On THIS point, I will agree that men need to step back and take a chill pill, becase sending creep vibes? That's the men problem. Yeah yeah, relationships are complicated, deal with it.

HOWEVER, the Feminists attempt to rebut the MRAs, by saying that men are potential rapists and that women have to always keep that in mind and deal with men that way, that's BULLSHIT.

We're not allowed to treat women negatively based on some cultural stereotype. Gender equality mandates that women SHOULDN"T treat us that way either.
Let him land on any Lyran world to taste firsthand the wrath of peace loving people thwarted by the myopic greed of a few miserly old farts- Katrina Steiner
User avatar
PainRack
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7581
Joined: 2002-07-07 03:03am
Location: Singapura

Re: Who are we not allowed to criticize?

Post by PainRack »

Eleas wrote: No, you know what? Fuck that. It is not incumbent on anyone to put other people's fragile egos before their own bodily safety, not in situations where a moment's simple thought on part of the active participant (the man, in this case) would have sufficed to not create a threatening space and situation in the first place. This notion of a woman having an obligation to put the feelings of others above their own safety is one of the reasons why "no means no" still meets resistance. After all, she should be considerate of his feelings, and he was only kidding around, et cetera.
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.


I say again. Watson? That incident was overblown and attacked by MRAs. Creep vibes? Men fault.

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?

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? If you can't understand that my question was directed at Jogurt stance on men should be uncomfortable, then just ignore it. 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.
Last edited by PainRack on 2013-08-26 01:45am, edited 1 time in total.
Let him land on any Lyran world to taste firsthand the wrath of peace loving people thwarted by the myopic greed of a few miserly old farts- Katrina Steiner
Post Reply