The problem with "Every man is a potential rapist"

[Paidiske]

Why is acknowledging that we have no way to tell who will rape, and who will not, bigoted?

 

[Gadarene]

This largely sums up my beliefs.

"Every man is a rapist" is true

"Every man is a potential rapist" you surely meant to say.

but, even as women, I do find the statement problematic because it, for lack of better term, is promoted. To me, it just breeds fear. Like it or not, such phrases, if parroted enough, can color the way we view our world and the individual in it. It would be like promoting a statement such as "every Muslim is a potential terrorist". True, but, while in this very brief span of time much terrorism may be linked to Islamic extremism (or at least the terrorism the media reports), this does mean such was true in the past, nor will be in the future, nor is terrorism always fueled by Islam (or any religion) now. A virtually infinite number of "every (insert people group) is a potential (insert undesirable)" could be composed, with some level of accuracy.

Thank you, and it really is that simple. In this debate, supposedly about gender equality, men are talked to in ways that would cause massive outrage and possibly firings if any other group were spoken to in that way, and men are getting increasingly sick of it.

 

[Gadarene]

Why is acknowledging that we have no way to tell who will rape, and who will not, bigoted?

Yeah, that statement is gender neutral. Schrodinger's Rapist is not.

Like I said, try expressing that sort of sentiment about black people and theft. Or Jewish people and fraud. Or Muslims and terrorism. Try expressing that among the sorts of self-righteous progressives who concoct ideas like Schrodinger's Rapist, and let me know how far you get.

That idea you are defending is morally equivalent to locking your car door every time a dark skinned person walks past.

 

[Paidiske]

As I understand it, Schrödinger’s Rapist was an illustration devised to explain to men why women might seek to protect themselves, even from guys who are not rapists. In that sense, it wasn't gender neutral, because the social interaction it was explaining isn't gender neutral.

But the underlying principle is gender neutral; we simply can't predict who will behave badly towards us.

 

[Gadarene]

As I understand it, Schrödinger’s Rapist was an illustration devised to explain to men why women might seek to protect themselves, even from guys who are not rapists. In that sense, it wasn't gender neutral, because the social interaction it was explaining isn't gender neutral.

Right, it's just pure coincidence that sort of sentiment is only considered acceptable among equality-seeking progressives when it's directed at men.

But the underlying principle is gender neutral; we simply can't predict who will behave badly towards us.

And yet that isn't considered an excuse for profiling people based on innate traits. If you consider that anyone male or female might rape you, that's at least consistent. Schrodinger's Rapist isn't that.

 

[Dave-W]

"The definition of "rape" requires penetration. Women lack the equipment to penetrate."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finger

Realy?

The ONLY way that works (given the legal definition) is for a woman to insert her finger into a guy's anus. Is that what you think they are doing?

 

[Dave-W]

Why is acknowledging that we have no way to tell who will rape, and who will not, bigoted?

To be equal, is that not the same as saying that "we have no way to tell" which black man will pull a gun on us, and who will not; or "we have no way to tell" which muslim will be a terrorist, and who will not.

All statements can be true. But they are all bigoted.

 

[Dave-W]

"Male rapists" (potential or otherwise) is singling out one subset of all rapists based on nothing more than gender, which is a class protected against discrimination.

And what is the alternative? "Female rapists?"

I addressed that one already. Females can be sex offenders but not rapists.

 

[Armoured]

And what is the alternative? "Female rapists?"

I addressed that one already. Females can be sex offenders but not rapists.

A legal definition more and more outdated.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_of_males#Female-on-male_rape

 

[Dave-W]

A legal definition more and more outdated.

2013 is OUTDATED??? That is only 3 years ago.

The previous definition was in use for over 80 years.

As to that wiki article - other than the paragraph heading, they use the phrase "female-on-male sexual violence."
Yes, it does speak of "men reported being 'made to penetrate," but that is not rape. The term is from the French name for a weapon used in fencing - the rapier. (as opposed to the lighter foils and the heavier cutlasses)

I understand that in popular usage "rape" = any kind of unwanted sexual contact. That is reflected in that wiki article. But that is NOT the actual definition.

 

[Armoured]

2013 is OUTDATED??? That is only 3 years ago.

The previous definition was in use for over 80 years.

As to that wiki article - other than the paragraph heading, they use the phrase "female-on-male sexual violence."
Yes, it does speak of "men reported being 'made to penetrate," but that is not rape. The term is from the French name for a weapon used in fencing - the rapier. (as opposed to the lighter foils and the heavier cutlasses)

I understand that in popular usage "rape" = any kind of unwanted sexual contact. That is reflected in that wiki article. But that is NOT the actual definition.

If a woman has sex with a man who doesn't consent to having sex with her, what do you call that?

 

[Dave-W]

If a woman has sex with a man who doesn't consent to having sex with her, what do you call that?

The state of Michigan calls it "Criminal Sexual Conduct." I call it a sexual assault.

 

[Armoured]

The state of Michigan calls it "Criminal Sexual Conduct." I call it a sexual assault.

And other places call it rape. Because that's what it is.

 

[Paidiske]

To be equal, is that not the same as saying that "we have no way to tell" which black man will pull a gun on us, and who will not; or "we have no way to tell" which muslim will be a terrorist, and who will not.

No, I don't think that saying "we have no way to tell who will rape" is the same as saying "we have no way to tell which black man will pull a gun," etc.

In the second sentence you've introduced a qualifier - race - which I didn't put into the first sentence.

Men may not like these facts, but they are facts; rape (however defined) is largely a crime committed by men against women. Women have to make snap judgements, all the time, about how safe they are in any given situation, and particularly when with men, not because we're bigoted against men, but because we need to protect ourselves. And that, (as I understand it), is really all the Schrödinger’s Rapist illustration was trying to explain.

 

[Dave-W]

No, I don't think that saying "we have no way to tell who will rape" is the same as saying "we have no way to tell which black man will pull a gun," etc.

In the second sentence you've introduced a qualifier - race - which I didn't put into the first sentence.

And my other example brought in religion.

You did not put gender in there; but it is there none the less, since women lack the equipment to rape.

Men may not like these facts, but they are facts; rape (however defined) is largely a crime committed by men against women.

And there you DID bring gender into it.

... not because we're bigoted against men, but because we need to protect ourselves.

Could not the same be said against blacks and muslims?

 

[WolfGate]

Idealism about bigotry and prejudice and stereotyping aside, the odds of being killed by a terrorist are about 1 in 20 million. At the same time, studies show a range of between 1 in 5 to 1 in 40 college girls report being sexually assaulted.
Practically women do need to take a more cautious approach - but that approach is wrong if it assume that every man would rape in the right circumstances.

 

[Paidiske]

And there you DID bring gender into it.

Could not the same be said against blacks and muslims?

I don't think it's the same. Maybe because I don't feel like anyone pulling a gun, or being a terrorist, is a very high risk in any situation I'm likely to encounter, so treating everyone (or everyone of a specific group) as if they might do that seems very unreasonable.

But - while I am fortunate enough never to have been raped myself - rape is so utterly commonplace that many many people I know personally have been raped, by everyone from their date to their bus driver to their priest. The risk seems high and close in comparison to the other things you mentioned.

Every single day, I have to think about where I go, what I say, what I wear, what I drink, to whom I open my front door, (etc etc) lest I somehow get myself into a situation where I attract the attention of a rapist who will be able to overpower me. Trying to explain that level of constant stress to people who've never had to give it a second - or indeed a first - thought is quite difficult. Hence analogies like Schrödinger’s Rapist.

 

[Dave-W]

And my cousin and his wife just lived a few blocks from Columbine HS when those 2 bombed and shot up the place. So they moved. To Aurora a couple of blocks from where another nut case opened fire on the viewers of a movie.

But not everyone is a potential mass murderer like those guys. They (my cuz and his wife) are very leery however.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

Every single day, I have to think about where I go, what I say, what I wear, what I drink, to whom I open my front door, (etc etc) lest I somehow get myself into a situation where I attract the attention of a rapist who will be able to overpower me. Trying to explain that level of constant stress to people who've never had to give it a second - or indeed a first - thought is quite difficult. Hence analogies like Schrödinger’s Rapist.

Perhaps you're needlessly letting your fears get to you. My wife says she doesn't suffer from this stress at all. She doesn't worry about any of the things you do.

And it's one thing to internally harbor these fears. You can live your life however you like. It's another matter entirely when the social narrative is that all men are potential rapists, because it stereotypes and stigmatizes men. It's as insulting as saying (as I heard recently) that a woman can't be president because she goes insane every month.

 

[Paidiske]

Perhaps you're needlessly letting your fears get to you. My wife says she doesn't suffer from this stress at all. She doesn't worry about any of the things you do.

So she would walk anywhere, at any time of day or night, alone? Dressed however she'd like? Perhaps after a drink or two? Or does she take these precautions so automatically now that she doesn't even think about them?

It's another matter entirely when the social narrative is that all men are potential rapists, because it stereotypes and stigmatizes men.

I do believe my first post in this thread was saying that the "all men" bit was unhelpful. I don't think all men are potential rapists. My point was that I can't know which men the potential rapists are.