The problem with "Every man is a potential rapist"

[Paidiske]

You gave examples on a social level, and I agreed that we could work on minimising them on a social level (making classrooms safe environments etc).

But you are attacking me on a personal level, and I dispute that there is any adverse affect on men because of my personal behaviours. And you are asserting something you cannot possibly either know or demonstrate, since you are not in my life to observe it. And because I know that, and you know that, it leaves me wondering why you feel a need to make such an unjustified personal attack?

 

[Gadarene]

Btw Paidiske, most of the guys in this thread - with emphasis on "guys" - have told you why this attitude of yours is wrong.

And this includes an antifeminist like myself, who has often clashed quite severely with several of the other guys on here when it comes to other feminist issues.

Food for thought.

 

[Gadarene]

You gave examples on a social level, and I agreed that we could work on minimising them on a social level (making classrooms safe environments etc).

But you are attacking me on a personal level, and I dispute that there is any adverse affect on men because of my personal behaviours. And you are asserting something you cannot possibly either know or demonstrate, since you are not in my life to observe it. And because I know that, and you know that, it leaves me wondering why you feel a need to make such an unjustified personal attack?

Come on, Paidiske. When does this ever get asked towards anyone else when they are personally expressing the same sort of stereotyped thinking of minority groups? It never does. These sorts of observations only come out when men complain about unfair treatment, and part of the reason I get so annoyed with arguing about this is that we know how well your statements would go down if Privilegey McPrivilegeface cis-white-straight-males like me said them in defence of their own appeals to stereotype of minority groups.

You don't know most men, or the details of their lives either, Paidiske. But you think they should all be treated as potential rapists. Be consistent. It really isn't difficult.

 

[Paidiske]

Quite frankly, I don't care what guys, who do not have my experience of being harassed, threatened, sexually assaulted etc in public, think about what I do to protect myself. They can walk a mile in my shoes, then get back to me.

 

[Gadarene]

Quite frankly, I don't care what guys, who do not have my experience of being harassed, threatened, sexually assaulted etc in public, think about what I do to protect myself. They can walk a mile in my shoes, then get back to me.

If you walked a mile in a guy's shoes your rates of harassment and threat would actually be considerably higher.

But hey, man bad, woman good, man bad, woman good.

Look, I was assaulted when I was in my teens. My attackers were low-income guys. I also grew up in a not very white area so I used to be apprehensive around non-white people.

What did I do? I challenged my stereotyped thinking, and this is despite becoming hyperanxious in public as a result of that assault, particularly at night. I just wish feminists who peddle sexist nonsense like Schrodinger's Rapist would make even a fraction of the effort I did to overcome my own prejudices.

Your feelings don't make prejudice ok, period.

 

[Paidiske]

If you walked a mile in a guy's shoes your rates of harassment and threat would actually be considerably higher.

Source?

But either way, it's irrelevant. We all have the right to make decisions to protect our own safety. (Like, you know, basic non-adversely-affecting other people stuff like when and where we go out, or whether we take the bus or drive).

 

[Gadarene]

Source?

You didn't prove men rape more than women earlier. I have no desire to make more of an effort in this thread than you are, particularly when you are the one engaging in antimale bigotry here.

But this seems to be the way with you. We're just supposed to fall over and agree that your bigotry against men is ok because you had a few bad things happen to you, but we have to prove that men are assaulted more than women!

But either way, it's irrelevant. We all have the right to make decisions to protect our own safety. (Like, you know, basic non-adversely-affecting other people stuff like when and where we go out, or whether we take the bus or drive).

Not if it involves generalising any group other than men.

 

[Paidiske]

But this seems to be the way with you. We're just supposed to fall over and agree that your bigotry against men is ok because you had a few bad things happen to you, but we have to prove that men are assaulted more than women!

Hey, you claimed it, if you don't want to back it up, that's fine.

Not if it involves generalising any group other than men.

Honestly, if it involves no adverse impact on anyone, then I don't think it matters what generalisations are involved in your reasoning. It only becomes a problem when it actually has a negative impact on someone. Otherwise, have whatever generalisations you want, in your head, if you can treat people fairly despite them.

(I mean, seriously, you're going to say it's an issue if I decide I'm more at risk on public transport and choose to drive? That harms any man how?)

 

[Gadarene]

Hey, you claimed it, if you don't want to back it up, that's fine.

Said the person who hasn't backed up most of her assertions

Honestly, if it involves no adverse impact on anyone, then I don't think it matters what generalisations are involved in your reasoning. It only becomes a problem when it actually has a negative impact on someone. Otherwise, have whatever generalisations you want, in your head, if you can treat people fairly despite them.

(I mean, seriously, you're going to say it's an issue if I decide I'm more at risk on public transport and choose to drive? That harms any man how?)

I mean, seriously, you're going to say it's an issue if I decide to lock my car doors while a black person walks past? That harms any black person how?

 

[Ana the Ist]

Yeah, but "everyone is armed" isn't discriminatory.

"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.

Eh...that's a solid point.

 

[Paidiske]

You may lock your car door whenever you like. It harms nobody for you to do so.

 

[Gadarene]

You may lock your car door whenever you like. It harms nobody for you to do so.

And if I only do so when it's a black person walking past, I'm unlikely to be discriminating against them only in terms of when I lock my car door. One must think something about all black people to rationalise that, and there is little reason to assume that idea won't have ramefications elsewhere.

 

[Paidiske]

I take your point, and that's why things like employment practices need careful safeguards. But when it comes to the sort of personal safety stuff we're talking about here, I go back to my point; people have the right to make decisions about their own safety.

 

[Gadarene]

I take your point, and that's why things like employment practices need careful safeguards. But when it comes to the sort of personal safety stuff we're talking about here, I go back to my point; people have the right to make decisions about their own safety.

Sure they do. I can't physically make people stop thinking silly things like Schrodinger's rapist, I can only convince them out of it, or at least counter and isolate them in order to inoculate wider society from their ideas if they are wrongheaded.

That people have the right to make decisions about their own safety doesn't mean all of those decisions will be smart, or sensible, of course. And simply falling back to "well I have a right to do it" isn't really indicative that your particular decisions are a good idea. And I repeat - if these decisions involve generalising minority groups and they are verbalised, this "oh but they have to right to make decisions about their personal safety &c." line virtually never shows up. You're racist/sexist/whateverist for thinking that - and rightly so.

 

[Dave-W]

I had never heard the term "Schrödinger’s Rapist" before this thread; although I was familiar with the Schrödinger’s Cat thing. So I looked it up (and verified my thoughts that they were related).

An interesting prospective: Shuffling feet: a black man’s view on Schroedinger’s Rapist

I found the comparison on another site to Russian Roulette to be very apropos. There is only a 0.166666 chance in any particular round of having the bullet chambered; but on average, 1 time out of 6 it WILL be chambered. It is that risk that you are wanting to avoid.

To get rid of that risk, you can either remove the bullet or get rid of the gun altogether. So what would be the proper way to eliminate the rape threat from men - emasculate every male child?

 

[Dave-W]

But the underlying principle is gender neutral.
I don't know about you, but I behave differently towards men and women in general

In an earlier post you asked what I was accusing you of. You answered it right here.

The fact that you react within yourself differently to men and women is profiling and prejudiced. Also - I do not think that is necessarily bad or un-called for; but it IS discriminatory and you need to recognize it as such.

Until you react to women as being potential rapists the EXACT SAME way and degree you react to men, you are being prejudiced.

 

[RDKirk]

In an earlier post you asked what I was accusing you of. You answered it right here.

The fact that you react within yourself differently to men and women is profiling and prejudiced. Also - I do not think that is necessarily bad or un-called for; but it IS discriminatory and you need to recognize it as such.

Until you react to women as being potential rapists the EXACT SAME way and degree you react to men, you are being prejudiced.

The experience of my daughter and some women I knew in the military is that the risk of sexual harassment is no less from women than it is from men. That's especially true if their wear their hair short (as my daughter did and as military women often do).

 

[Dave-W]

The experience of my daughter and some women I knew in the military is that the risk of sexual harassment is no less from women than it is from men.

There is a big difference between sexual harassment and rape.

 

[RDKirk]

There is a big difference between sexual harassment and rape.

Not to hear a lot of feminists.

If we are talking about a fear of potential rapists, I'd agree that a sexual harasser--of either gender--rates as "potential."

 

[ToddNotTodd]

I mean, seriously, you're going to say it's an issue if I decide to lock my car doors while a black person walks past? That harms any black person how?

I knew a woman once with believed as you do. She thought she wasn't affecting the men she stereotyped and took "precautions" against. But she actually was. Unbeknownst to her, she very visibly reacted to the presence of men that everyone could see, except her. She denied it up and down, even after several men mentioned it to her. Her fear of men blinded her to the fact that she was being a bigot.

So my question to you is, how do you know you aren't doing the same?

And as for harm, you are reinforcing this stereotype on the internet, right?