Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Kedly]

Ugh... am I the only one who feels like I'm being blamed for just being male? I think I'm understanding that the point is that we need to remove violence as a characteristic of masculinity, which in itself is a valid point, but halfway through the article I felt under fire just because I'm male.

[Glowcat]

Ugh... am I the only one who feels like I'm being blamed for just being male? I think I'm understanding that the point is that we need to remove violence as a characteristic of masculinity, which in itself is a valid point, but halfway through the article I felt under fire just because I'm male.

It attacked how aggressiveness and entitlement to female sexuality is commonly an aspect of the masculine image. It attacked the way women end up being blamed when the only issue should be a man being an asshole (and society coming down on that). I'm not sure where you got the idea that the author was blaming you for being male. Care to explain which parts you found problematic?

------------

Speaking of assholes behaving badly and blame being misplaced: http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/10/03/947981/court-requires-disabled-rape-victim-to-prove-she-fought-back-calls-for-evidence-of-biting-kicking-scratching/?mobile=nc

Yeah. That happened. Anyone selling tickets off this planet?

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Speaking of assholes behaving badly and blame being misplaced: http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/10/03/947981/court-requires-disabled-rape-victim-to-prove-she-fought-back-calls-for-evidence-of-biting-kicking-scratching/?mobile=nc

Yeah. That happened. Anyone selling tickets off this planet?

Note that the court's ruling is not completely illogical, as the victim is incapable of speaking and would only have been able to demonstrate her lack of consent through physical actions.

The court's real failing is not recognizing that someone with the cognitive abilities of a 3-year old isn't capable of consenting at all.

[Reelya]

I find it problematic, but it's a lot to go into.

Well she talks about how males / females should be largely interchangeable, fair enough.

Then she talks about "gendered violence" => domestic violence. A lot of feminist literature says that females make up 95% of victims. But other reports show that about 40% of domestic violence cases are female abuser / male victim. Hiding one set of victims to highlight another set of victims is indefensible in my book if you want to claim any objectivity.

A good example, as Hugo Schywzer just put it in a Role/Reboot piece, is that "Too many of us do accept a similarly indefensible argument: that short skirts can drive men to rape."

Who the fuck thinks that's correct? I've certainly NEVER met another guy in my life who ever said anything like "she was asking for it". I'm pretty certain if this was brought up as a defense of rape 99/100 males would want to lynch the rapist.

One thing covered here that this same crowd are pushing was that playing tag was "rape training". someone on bay12 mentioned seeing a TV advert of kids playing in the playground and all the little boys with arrows labeled "potential abuser". I can only think that's related to "boys games = rape training" meme that was common with educators a few years ago.

[Sirus]

I would be one of those 99.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

A good example, as Hugo Schywzer just put it in a Role/Reboot piece, is that "Too many of us do accept a similarly indefensible argument: that short skirts can drive men to rape."

Who the fuck thinks that's correct? I've certainly NEVER met another guy in my life who ever said anything like "she was asking for it". I'm pretty certain if this was brought up as a defense of rape 99/100 males would want to lynch the rapist.

Unfortunately, people like this do exist. I may in fact be living in close quarters with one, it would be in line with his other opinions. It may not be as blatant as that, however. In most cases you will hear it more as "She shouldn't have put herself in danger by dressing so provocatively" and such.

It is a lot more prevalent the more repressed a society gets, hence why the Islamic world is a powder keg for this stuff and you'll hear about things like women being gang raped, charged with indecency, and then gang raped again by the police because she showed her fucking hair or something. It's crazy. The US is nowhere even remotely near that, but there are still plenty of neo-puritians in it.

[Reelya]

IDK, i agree that people should be able to dress how they want, but i also agree that you can put yourself at risk. Just because a consequence is unfair doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

I agree a short skirt doesn't "drive a man to rape", but if a girl was walking alone after dark in a dangerous neighborhood scantily dressed, she could definitely draw unwanted attention.

Same as if you were white and went to some neighborhoods where there are black gangs. May sound racist to say that, but there are definitely neighborhoods in the USA that white people shouldn't walk alone. Does it mean i'm anti-white if I say a white person asked for trouble going there? Or that i'm anti-black for pointing out that a specific area had black people who were actually dangerous?

tl;dr i don't think saying "you put yourself at risk dressing like that" is ANYWHERE near the "rapist defense" that short skirts make it OK.

[scriver]

In other words, you accept the argument that short skirts drive men to rape?

[Reelya]

One thing i take offence to is how male => female violence is the ONLY violence that matters. But according to studies, each gender is almost equally likely to initiate domestic violence. Address violence in BOTH sexes or STFU.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2010/sep/05/men-victims-domestic-violence

About two in five of all victims of domestic violence are men, contradicting the widespread impression that it is almost always women who are left battered and bruised, a new report claims.

Men assaulted by their partners are often ignored by police, see their attacker go free and have far fewer refuges to flee to than women, says a study by the men's rights campaign group Parity.

The charity's analysis of statistics on domestic violence shows the number of men attacked by wives or girlfriends is much higher than thought. Its report, Domestic Violence: The Male Perspective, states: "Domestic violence is often seen as a female victim/male perpetrator problem, but the evidence demonstrates that this is a false picture."

Data from Home Office statistical bulletins and the British Crime Survey show that men made up about 40% of domestic violence victims each year between 2004-05 and 2008-09, the last year for which figures are available. In 2006-07 men made up 43.4% of all those who had suffered partner abuse in the previous year, which rose to 45.5% in 2007-08 but fell to 37.7% in 2008-09.

[Glowcat]

Note that the court's ruling is not completely illogical, as the victim is incapable of speaking and would only have been able to demonstrate her lack of consent through physical actions.

The court's real failing is not recognizing that someone with the cognitive abilities of a 3-year old isn't capable of consenting at all.

This fits into the putting the blame on women. As RAINN pointed out, women who are attacked are almost always physically weaker than their attacker and if they did react in a way which proved "lack of consent" they could very well provoke an even more violent response. It's like the people who first created those laws didn't stop to think a woman might be seriously worried about her life in that situation...

But yeah, there's also the whole incapable of consent in the first place deelio, so all around it's a pretty shitty ruling and a pretty shitty law.

[Reelya]

@Scriver: You're putting words in my mouth and obviously not attempting to understand what i said. no strawman for me thx.

nobody was driven to rape by clothing. it's not a defense. But saying it's not a defense doesn't mean it's not possible to put yourself in danger.

girls SHOULD be able to walk late a night, alone, safely. But in reality, that puts them at risk. Am I claiming "night time drives men to rape" by saying that?

[scriver]

So what exactly do you mean, if not that?

[Reelya]

Dude, it IS possible for a girl to put herself at risk by ANY number of things. Clothes probably is a part of that (in that they get noticed by the bad guys).

Just pointing out the risk factors isn't saying that those factors "excuse" rape.

Like i said, "late at night" is high-risk. Is saying "that girl shouldn't have been out alone in the industrial estate at that hour" saying that "late night drives men to rape"?

[Glowcat]

Except your assumption that sexual assault is primarily about desire for sex is flawed (Hint: it's more about control over another person) and you're pretty much stating that women shouldn't wear "provocative clothes" if they don't want to tempt an assault (Hint: That's blaming them), as if it was a reasonable restriction, so... yeah.

Oh, and classic "BUT WHAT ABOUT TEH MENZ!" complaint about the article. Really classy. As if pointing out problems women face can't be done on its own without implicitly declaring all issues men face to be invalid. Nevermind that the issue of under reporting domestic abuse on the male side is also due to the image of masculinity or anything.. the author should just STFU because she didn't make it her topic.

[KaelGotDwarves]

Just wanted to come in and report that GreatJustice doesn't know what he's talking about.

I just spent 3 weeks in Singapore and my mum had various injuries that we had to go to the hospital for.

Singaporeans pay an extremely high tax rate, but hospital fees and other services are "cheaper". Thus like Thailand, where I am now, you see many "medical tourists" from the US, Europe, Australia, middle-east, and other parts of Asia.

It's extremely socialised in Singapore.