Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
The attitudes which have been shown to underpin male violence against women (including rape) boil down to three key things:
- The acceptability of violence
- A belief that women are inferior to men
- An acceptance of rigidly stereotyped gender roles.
I don't know so much about the attitudes of females who are violent against men (including rape), but it's clear that their beliefs around inferiority and gender roles are going to be different, because a woman who is violent towards a man doesn't usually believe herself to be his inferior or accept the stereotypical "meek and submissive" role for women.
The problem with "Every man is a potential rapist" is that it implies that sexual assault is an explosion waiting to happen in every male member of our species.
....... discussions where people, including men themselves, were saying that if you are a man you are fooling yourself if you think that you are not capable of ever raping a woman. ....
-----------------------------Obviously that is true ..... I suspect they would object pretty strongly if someone said "every woman is a potential false accuser of rape". (Yes they would.)
..... I suspect in the end I'll wind up trying to teach my daughter a similar strategy for when she is off at school.
I am aware of these, and I'm afraid that we are again talking about different things here. I have no problems admitting statistical truths.
My problem is the rhetoric, which has more than one meaning. I have already said this, and so has @RDKirk but I repeat it once more:
The phrase "All men are potential rapists" is used by certain feminists to promote an idea of men being monsters who are only tamed temporarily, and are all the time seeking way to get out of their chains to attack women. Not just some men, but all men.
It's at the very best demeaning, and at the worst discriminatory view on males. That is why I take offense with the usage of that phrase.
You literally just contradicted yourself. Why on earth should we take that point seriously? You don't have any more clue what it's like to be a man anymore than we do about being a woman.
You evidently aren't aware men are more likely to be physically assaulted, for one. And yet most men I know don't seem to have this overweening fear of it that so many women have which tends to outright bigotry.
So what you are doing is out-and-out bigotry.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-syrian-refugees-trayvon-martin-a7318496.html
I mean, this is literally used today to describe refugees and in the past, the Jews by the Nazis.
How much clearly do you need it pointed out that what you are saying is bigotry? You do realise that applies to men too, right?
I'd prefer if you stopped being bigoted, not least given the whining that occurs when women are spoken of in the same fashion.
Fear is an unreliable evaluator of risk, and it is obviously leading you into bigotry. Reconsider.
And I knew as soon as you posted that figure that you haven't looked into this even remotely. That 1 in 71 line is a dead giveaway.
Pull up that CDC study, and have a look at the stats for men "made to penetrate".
I'd like still to bring up the alternative meaning of the phrase, which means that all men are deep down rapists. It's a bit inflammatory rhetoric, and can be easily understood that way, suggesting that you can never trust a man, and men must be controlled all the time because of their heinous nature.
I hope this doesn't sound like nitpicking, and if you happen to live on a very conservative country, or area, I understand that my concerns might sound outlandish, but the constant demeaning tone towards men in public discussion in my country has been a mainstream cultural force for a while and I think it's the next big threat for an actual gender-equal culture.
I need to clarify something because you criticized me heavily for fearing all men..... are you saying you were raped by men?...If yes I cant understand why you didnt empathize with my thoughts... and being raped by men kinda fulfills my point anyway....If you werent...well what was all the harassment you did because if you werent then all the words you directed my way were just vexacious and empty..... But I dont expect you to answer because if you were raped by men then u have no need to say a dam thing....if u werent then u should be ashamed of yourself and perhaps saying nothing is still your best optionWhen I was assaulted, what I didn't do was treat all people of the same gender, race, economic background as people to be feared by default.
And yes, I had to work on that. Do the same.
Physically. And no, my point is unchanged. And no, you are not being harassed (kek).I need to clarify something because you criticized me heavily for fearing all men..... are you saying you were raped by men?...If yes I cant understand why you didnt empathize with my thoughts... and being raped by men kinda fulfills my point anyway....If you werent...well what was all the harassment you did because if you werent then all the words you directed my way were just vexacious and empty..... But I dont expect you to answer because if you were raped by men then u have no need to say a dam thing....if u werent then u should be ashamed of yourself and perhaps saying nothing is still your best option
Yes, I did read some of it (though not all as there are many pages). Some here, however, seem to imply that taking precautions against potentially dangerous situations is profiling in a bigoted fashion. One person even stated that his wife doesn't feel the need to be cautious in some areas that I listed above. I honestly don't remember which person said that...it was several pages back. It concerns me when some believe common sense precautions are wrong due to potential profiling- even when it isn't because of profiling. Does that make sense? It isn't wrong to take care of yourself. That doesn't mean we said "he likely is a rapist" each time we see a man. It just means we take precautions to protect ourselves.
My husband recently made sure I had pepper spray for around town. There were a series of women in their 20s and young 30s held at gunpoint by middle age white men in the alleyways. It makes perfect sense to me to protect against that scenario. That doesn't mean all middle age white men are going to hold me up at gunpoint...but i will protect myself against that scenario. (In this case it was the same two men consistently.) Behind my garage (which is not connected to our house), there is a mission youth center. One of the young men raped a girl behind my house. I'm particularly careful there. We put motion sensor lights up, secured our gate for a more secure entry into our yard. That doesn't mean all men from that youth center are rapists, but it is common sense to be cautious there as well, imho.
But which is more efficient? Since 90+% of the rapists are men, should that not be where you get the most "bang for the buck?"At what cost? Increasing prejudice against men. Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should.
But here's an idea - maybe we could stop even more rapes if....bear with me - we acknowledged the *other* gender that rapes.
Exactly. That is the "artificial means" I mentioned in a subsequent post.Hmm.... objects?
If I was to say that all drivers are potentially dangerous drivers, would you take offense at that?
That is a very narrow road indeed.How can we find a way to have a constructive discussion about inequality, women's oppression, domestic violence, rape, and so on, without creating the cultural narrative that "men are evil"?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?