There’s been a bit of a fuss recently about seating of children on airplanes in New Zealand. A man who was seated next to a child travelling alone was asked to change his seat, because the airline has a policy against men sitting next to unaccompanied minors. The man objected, the fuss reached the press, the airline claimed that it was only doing what most airlines do on international flights. (Why not domestic flights?) In the fallout, there have been many cogent objections to the policy:
Mr Latta agreed studies of sexual offenders showed somewhere between 70 and 90 percent were male but the airlines’ policy would not help protect children.
“In 15 years of working with thousands of sexual offenders I’ve never treated or heard of a man who sexually offended against a child on a plane.”
New Zealand’s Green Party says the airlines policy banning men from sitting next to unaccompanied children is discriminatory and will take the matter to the Human Rights Commissioner.
Green MP Keith Locke said the policy was an example of moral panic about men posing as potential threats to children.
They’re all quite correct: It is a stupid policy, it won’t help children, it’s discrimination, and it’s moral panic.
It’s also an extremely common and widespread bigotry, although not one usually codified in policy.
Reading about the New Zealand flap, I was reminded of a study by anthropologist Susan Murray that was published in the academic journal Gender and Society. The study’s subject was men who work in child care in the U.S.. From Murray’s article:
In my study, many workers, both men and women, talked about how the men who are child care workers are subject to different unwritten rules regarding their physical access ot children. Specifically, in many centers, men are more restricted in their freedom to touch, cuddle, nap, and change diapers for children. As one worker who I surveyed stated, “I have worked in centers that employ male caregivers. Parents have on occasion been hesitant to accept them. One parent explicitly asked that a male caregiver not rub her daughter’s back at naptime.” […]
…My data clearly showed numerous cases in which parents clearly did not want their children taken care of by a man at all. Sometimes parents requested another caregiver for their children; at other times, parents refused to enroll their children or withdrew them once they discovered a man was working at the center.
The article goes on to recount many other examples of male childcare workers being discriminated against in this exact way – men are not supposed to be in physical contact with children. Murray, in a discussion of the implications of this, suggests that the bigotry against male caregivers is rooted in sexism and in bigotry against gay men (even if the caregiver isn’t gay).
In the case of men in child care, just the act of their caring for children calls into question their heterosexuality. The fact of their sexuality, whether gay or straight, need not ever be confirmed. It is their choice to do child care that arouses suspicion and leaves them vulnerable to homophobic reactions. Men’s actions become suspect because they are choosing to do something that women do and, even worse, because child care is undervalued employment for women. Gay is a sexualized identity. When a man admits to being, is discovered to be, or is suspected of being gay, his gay identity may come to define everything else. He is, then, seen as someone who is guided by sexual practices, thoughts, and feelings in all else he undertakes. Within the child care setting, anything having to do with adult sexuality is strictly off-limits. So, when a person’s identity as a gay person is discovered or even suspected (as may be the case with straight men doing “women’s work”), that person’s competence as a teacher/caregiver gets called into question. To the extent that being gay is viewed as a perversion, it is linked with other perversions, such as child sexual abuse.
Murray also discusses the “glass elevator” effect, in which men in childcare professions are promoted to administrative positions more often and more easily – an advantage to men who want to be administrators, but a disadvantage to ambitious women caregivers who’d like to advance, and to men who’d rather stay in direct childcare positions. The overall effect is to turn many child care centers into places where traditional gender roles are enforced.
[“Jeff,” a male childcare worker Murray interviewed, said:] “You just need to be ultracareful. In San Francisco the men Early Childhood Education teachers can’t have a child on their lap, the women can, but the men can’t. I’m thinking, what kind of a message does this send to the children?”
Murray concludes with the speculation that child care centers may be teaching children traditional gender roles: men as administrators and playmates, women as nurturers. This discrimination is bad for the men being discriminated against, and also bad for the girls and boys who are subjected to gender-discriminatory childcare.
Whoops! I see that Mr. Bad, shortly before posting here, wrote:
Clearly, he’s here to troll, not to have a sincere discussion. Banned.
Amp, I was referring to this passage:
“they actively seek out OPPORTUNITIES TO BE AROUND CHILDREN in their preferred age range. It is not uncommon for a pedophile to be a teacher, coach, youth director at church, YMCA, boy scout leader, day care worker, babysitter, child psychologist, child photographer, or in some other way be in trusted and daily contact with children. Occasionally, they stalk their victims no matter where it takes them. “
Lee, thanks for clarifying that – sorry I missed it on my first skim of the article.
I’m still a little dubious; the link doesn’t seem to say where this article comes from, what the author’s qualifications are, and the particular bit you quote isn’t supported by a citation in the article.
However, I don’t mean to send you on a wild goose chase; I realize that you have other calls on your time!
Amp – I chose that particular link partly because it comes with a bibliography. I believe it is the text of a lecture that this particular professor (Tom O’Connor, associate professor of Justice Studies at North Carolina Wesleyan Univ.) gives in a freshman-level class, but I can double-check that. I also chose it because the text echoes what I remember from my child abuse prevention class. This isn’t my area of expertise, so I apologize if this wasn’t the best site to prove my point with.
Sorry – it’s the text of a lecture he gives in his Forensic Psychology class.
Oh, and here is a link to something something somewhat more solid. Check out page 41 or thereabouts.
Elinor, Daran has a good point. It was over-the-top and unfair of you to accuse Quentin of defending rapists. I’m not banning you or anything, but please try not to make such extreme and horrible accusations unless they’re really, really well backed up by evidence.
I apologise. I think what I was trying to say is that very few people defend rapists by saying “he raped her and that’s okay”; usually they simply assume that plaintiffs, all plaintiffs, are liars. Certainly, though, I wouldn’t want to live in a society in which people automatically assumed rape accusations were true, any more than I like living in one wherein large numbers of people automatically assume they’re false, so I do apologise for that comment.
I’m sure its been mentioned in this mountains of posting. But just in case: the problem here isn’t systematic discrimination against men. Its rampant and bizarre lega bullshit. As a safety policy, the airline thing is inane, and discriminatory (though as I said, I dont view discrimination against men as comparable to discrimination against women in this culture)
The policy is bad for men, sure. But more to the point, the policy is bad for children, boys and girls. It supports a rape culture in which even thouse of us women and children who aren’t raped are taught to fear rape and view all men as rapists. As a kid, i liked to talk to adults–even strangers–in situations like airplanes, camp, etc. I learned a lot that way and developed self confidence. I think I would be wore off if I had wandered the world perpetually afraid of being attacked by adult men. I dont think my lack of fear made me more vulnerable to rape.
Meanwhile, i think the risk of rape on an airplane is as low or lower than in many other normal situations. Therefore the risk doesnt justify the discrimination.
A female instructor of mine in school got me drunk as hell and then took me home and we had sex. I felt really bad about it the next day, regretted it tremendously, etc. It has all the characteristics of “date rape:” Imbalance of power, alcohol leading to inability to give meaningful consent, etc., yet I’ve never had one single feminist (or woman for that matter) ever acknowledge that I was raped. The typical response is either “you really wanted it, even if you don’t admit it now” or “you just got lucky.” In fact, I did not consider myself lucky then, nor do I now, but I also don’t feel that I was raped. What really happened was that I screwed up, got too drunk and made some bad decisions. Just like most of these cases of so-called “date rape” that I hear of. End of story.
But why should that be the end of the story? You don’t feel that you were raped – fine, but why must everybody else feel that way? And how do you know that every story of drunken, unwanted sex is comparable to yours?
When it comes to seating on an airplane, I do not believe being asked to change seats is “discrimination.” As Robert pointed out, you are not guaranteed a particular seat on an airplane. bean
It IS discrimination because their rules specifically refer to men. There is nothing subtle about it. When employers are less inclined to employ women because they MIGHT get pregnant thats discrimination too.
I’m not talking about the MRA groups that promote the myths about DV and rape bean
MRAs aren’t alone in this.
Are you serious? Mary
Yes
OK, are you now, or have you ever been a woman? Mary
No. Ever been a man? Ever had a sexual relationship with a woman? There are things YOU don’t understand too.
Have you ever been kept in at night when your brother was allowed to go out, because “well, he’s a boy, and you might get in trouble”? Mary
No, but neither were my sisters. They did get more pocket money because they were girls. Come to think of it my brother was restricted because he was a naughty boy and HE might get into trouble.
Ever been passed up for a job in favor of a less- qualified man? Mary
Yes. I’ve also been passed over twice because of affirmative action rules. In one of these instances I did about a third of the job while the appointee got the extra pay. And no, I’m not angry about it. Certainly I was a bit miffed but I had plenty of other opportunities AND I agreed with AI in principle.
Ever been mercilessly talked over in every conversation involving members of the opposite sex? Mary
Shit yeah. Women do this FAR more than men.
Been groped in a bar? Mary
Yes. On one occasion a squirrel grip by a woman who thought she was being cute and didn’t even care that it hurt – in public too. Imagine if I did that to a woman.
Been told that your law school professors only call on you “because you have tits”? Mary
No. And I would berate anyone who said it in my presence. However I’m being told right now by you and others that I benefit from rape and am therefore complicit.
Been broken up with because you kept wanting your SO to understand where you were coming from as a feminist, but secretly you were just “angry all the time”? Mary
Strangely yes.
Been in a conversation where men judge a rape victim’s clothing or behavior but not the man’s decision to shove his penis in her vagina against her will? Mary
Yes, and equally by women. Blaming the victim is NOT gender specific.
Because all those things have happened to the women posting here. Hell, most of those things have happened to me alone. Mary
And we could go tit for tat forever. Thing is that if you go looking for discrimination or oppression you’ll always find it. Particularly if you are expecting to.
Don’t make the mistake of confusing “legal” equality with REAL equality. As long as men are allowed/encouraged by their peers to treat in the manner described above, they’ll be “allowed” to do a fuckton of things women aren’t. Mary
So now we have “legal” and REAL equality. I seem to recall somebody saying something about feminism always moving the goalposts. And wasn’t it Mao who said we need to stay in a constant state of revolution.
Once you take away the legal structures equality is what you make for yourself. You can’t expect it to be handed to you on a platter. There is nothing I, or anyone else, can do to make you “feel” more equal – particularly if you insist on constantly changing the rules. Only you can do that.
Just once!! Please just this once can we have a discussion about discrimination against men without it being turned into how all women are victimised.
Not in this circumstance we can’t. Sorry. Elinor
Not in ANY circumstance apparently.
Oh come on. I’ve already stated that I didn’t consider it rape. How many times do I need to repeat this?
You brought it up. You must have had a reason for bringing it up.Elinor
Actually I allowed myself to be sidetracked.
I think what I’m trying to get at here is that women can, and do, use men for sexual gratification without giving any consideration to their partner. And, yes, maybe sometimes this should be considered rape.
There’s a difference between being a bad lay and being a rapist. Nobody owes anybody else an orgasm, ever. I’m sorry if you’ve had partners who wouldn’t get you off, but refusing to perform sex acts is not a crime and if you think it should be then I’m really at a loss for words.Elinor
Actually I didn’t write much of that very well. I agree with you here. It’s really a topic for a different discussion. I got stuck here after mentioning having been raped by a woman when I was a kid. That was only relevant because I find it ironic that now I’m being told it’s me who can’t be trusted with kids. I will make the point though that women can rape(particularly if you accept current definitions) and generally they are oblivious to that fact.
As long as you refuse to acknowledge that men have feelings, as long as you deny men a voice, as long as you hold innocent people responsible for the acts of others then you are just as sexist as any man has ever been.
Behold the Holy Trinity of straw men!Elinor
In other words, “shut up”. I think you prove my point.
I believe there is in the case where a man continues after a woman has withdrawn consent. I couldn’t cite it though, nor can I recall which jurisdiction it applies to, no whether it was applicable given a different combination of genders. Daran
This occured in western Australia. He’s been dubbed the “30 second rapist”.
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/1987/46.html
Apparently he was set up so it’s not a good example but the fact is he WAS convicted and served time.
What it comes down to me is this, and it’s really simple: ultil men stop being the vast majority of child molesters and until men actually ostracize the rapists and child molesters, it’s premature to say the least to complain about discrimination. ginmar
Define “vast majority”. There’s very little research on predatory behaviour by women. What little I’ve seen puts sexual abuse of children by women at anywhere between 10% and 30% of all cases. The sexual assault counsellors I’m working with say that 30% is conservative.
There are cases of innocent men dying because they were mistaken for somebody on a sex offenders register. If you want us to believe that men dont ostracise sex offenders you’re living in a different universe to the rest of us.
I mean, if you really want to protect kids, you won’t go looking for gay guys: You’ll go looking for somebody in the family and they’ll identify as straight. ginmar
Actually you need to look at mum’s new boyfriend. He’s the most likely culprit.
Men need to be fighting this battle instead of whining about those evil feminists…whom they never quote correctly, probably because they don’t listen. The fact that the SYG losers spend so much time trolling indicates that they’re not doing anything about child molesting and wife beating or anything but whatever it is toy they didn’t get. ginmar
Why should I spend all my time campagning against men raping women when I have significant problems from being raped by a woman? Where are the feminists agitating against sexual abuse by women? Why can I get counselling because my mother was raped but not because I was? Why is it that I was a “lucky little boy”, particularly according to women, because I “got some” when I was eight? You tell me.
Basically our culture is not prepared to accept that women can transgress. Therefore we assume that it’s only men who can’t be trusted. Anyone who believes that feminism hasn’t played a part in this isn’t being honest with themselves.
Certainly, though, I wouldn’t want to live in a society in which people automatically assumed rape accusations were true….. Elinor
You already do. Typical media coverage already refers to plaintiffs as “victims” and defendants as “rapists” prior to any guilt being established.
…any more than I like living in one wherein large numbers of people automatically assume they’re false, so I do apologise for that comment. Elinor
It’s such a fine line we tread isn’t it. In order to ensure that innocent people aren’t punished unfairly we have to err on the side of caution. Adopting a little bit of scepticism to ensure this does not constitute a belief that all accusations are false. And it doesn’t help when feminists make up rape stories to make political points. This does their cause no good at all.
gwallen:
Exactly which feminists are you talking about here? I don’t know any woman that has made up a rape story for political gain. In fact, I don’t know anyone that has made up a rape story at all.
Now before you jump on me, I will say that false accusations do happen. But, I wouldn’t call a woman that does that a feminist any more than I call a man that abuses a woman one. Nice diversionary tactic though.
And it doesn’t help when feminists make up rape stories to make political points. This does their cause no good at all.
Exactly which feminists are you talking about here? I don’t know any woman that has made up a rape story for political gain. In fact, I don’t know anyone that has made up a rape story at all.
Now before you jump on me, I will say that false accusations do happen. But, I wouldn’t call a woman that does that a feminist any more than I call a man that abuses a woman one. Nice diversionary tactic though. Mendy
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,153969,00.html
From the article:
It was a nightmare for every female student and faculty/staff at Rollins. They were afraid to go to the bathroom or walk on campus alone after dusk….The incident prompted a candlelight vigil on campus in support of the alleged victim [then unnamed]
There have been at least two examples in Australia which I can’t find refs for.
There’s also this:
…men falsely accused of rape can benefit from the experience. Upon reflection, they may come to understand what they must have done to upset the woman. As for the distress caused men by false accusations, she reveals “it is not a pain I would necessarily have spared them.” Vassar College. Assistant Dean of Students ““ Catherine Comin
“it is not a pain I would necessarily have spared them.” How gracious of her.
Fox: the news source of record.
Fox: the news source of record.
Sheena: shooting the messenger.
Oddly enough I agree with Jake. I think that the assumption that causes the wierd reaction that people have to the idea of men caring for kids is based on the idea that male sexuality is inherantly predatory, rather than on an assumption that the men in question are gay. I’m sure that some people do think that men who go into childcare (or any other traditionally female occupation) are gay, but I don’t think that’s the primary reason for the strange fear that people have about men caring for kids.
The interesting thing here is, this is a very culture-specific assumption. Our culture seems to believe that men should not be physically affectionate with kids in general, and view such displays of affection with suspicion. In other parts of the world that I’ve lived in (the Middle East, Asia, North Africa) men are habitually much more physically demonstrative with kids. As a kid in Libya, my Dad’s Libyan friends and co-workers used to pick me up, throw me in the air so that they could catch me, cuddle me on their laps etc all the time, and nobody thought twice about it.
I also wonder how much of this is due to America’s tendency to go into periodic spasms of panic (the Summer of the Shark! Satanic Child Abuse cults at daycare!) that in no way reflect reality. Maybe it’s just a symptom of our culture’s continual refusal to deal with the fact that if children are going to be sexually abused, chances are that the abusers will be their own relatives. Maybe the anxiety about male childcare workers, teachers etc is a way to displace our cultural discomfort with that fact and our apparent inability to do anything to actually remedy the current situation.
“There have been at least two examples in Australia which I can’t find refs for.”
Try harder.
Or try this: http://www.yahoo.com.au
From Daran :
“I absolutely agree that creepy, scary sexual behavior is normalized in our culture. My favorite (favorite?) example is how stalking is still viewed in many circles as basically sweet, romantic behavior. “Ooh, he followed you home and stood outside your window and sang to you to win your love? How sweeeeet!” Yeah, no, not so much. ”
This is a big pet peeve of mine. Any time you see someone going on about how “Say Anything” is just SO romantic, it’s time to run. The stalking = romantic theme is pretty pervasive in our culture, and I habitually see behavior depicted as romantic that would give me the creeps. Persistence is a virtue when it comes to looking for a job, or learning to play a musical instrument. When it comes to romance, however, “persistence” looks an awful lot like harrassment to me.
Elinor – scary, scary link. For those who couldn’t be bothered to follow it, here’s the part she was referring to.
37. End the criminalization of normal male sexual behavior. Repeal all
> laws making male sexuality, exposure, penetration, etc., into a criminal
> act unless there is demonstrable physical harm to a victim. Release and
> pardon all men who have been arrested for “statutory rape,” “date rape,”
> “spousal rape,” “pornography,” “soliciting a prostitute,” and other
> weasel worded versions thereof. A woman’s hurt feelings does not turn a
> man into a criminal.
So rape is OK as long as it doesn’t leave any scars? Charming. And they wonder why we think they’re misogynists.
Also, did anyone else notice the part about repealing the drug laws for men (not people in general, just men). Anyone want to explain to me how they justify that?
Note : I actually do think that many of our drug laws should be substantially relaxed. The police and the justice system have better things to do than worry about some kids who smoke pot, and hardcore junkies are really far more dangerous to themselves than to anyone else. I’d be all for decriminilisation for users with easily-accesible treatment programs and needle exchanges readily avaliable to control the spread of disease (which our current policies are doing nothing at all to address). However, why is it OK for men to take drugs but apparently not OK for women?
Also, just FYI, this “no kids sitting next to men” policy is a fairly new thing. I flew as an unnacompanied minor frequently from about age 10-18, and sat next to men and women at about equal rates. What did used to happen was that the staff would come and check in with the kids on a regular basis, to make sure that they were behaving and keep them entertained as well as to keep them safe. That seems to me to be the smartest way to handle the situation, have the airline staff continually check up on the kids to make sure that they’re OK.
When it comes to romance, however, “persistence” looks an awful lot like harrassment to me.
I don’t know. You’re describing romantic persistence as intrinsically harassing, but doesn’t it depend on the pursued person’s reaction/feelings?
Say Jake asks Mary out and she says “gosh, thanks for the invitation, but I don’t know if that’s such a great idea” and three days later he asks her out again and she says “look, I’m flattered but I’m also really not interested – you have to stop asking me out” (or just “stop asking me out”), and he then stops and treats her with cordial friendliness (or whatever their relationship was before the asking) – what’s the harm? He put in a couple of at-bats, struck out, and returned to the bench. If he doesn’t stop at this point then I would opine he’s crossed a line. (Some people might extend the baseball metaphor and give an otherwise polite suitor three strikes.)
A lot of the time, the first time someone is asked out there is a no, but not an emphatic no. Sometimes it’s explicitly an inviting no, as in “gee, I really can’t right now because I am so swamped for finals…but maybe we could do something in January when things aren’t so crazy!”. Other times it’s much more of a judgment call. A fair proportion of those first nos are second-time yeses – not least because there are women who do value persistence as a character trait in a potential romantic match. My wife is such a person.
I recall in 7th grade there was a girl who was romantically interested in me, without reciprocation on my part. Gosh, she was rude and pushy about it. In her defense, we were both very young and socially awkward. Perhaps as a beneficial result I am less likely to engage in that kind of aggressive overture, because I remember that it didn’t feel good. I know women who feel the same way.
(Sorry about the thread derailing, but I figure at 225 comments, we’re pretty much out in open water here.)
“There have been at least two examples in Australia which I can’t find refs for.”
Try harder. Sheena
Why?
You’ve been presented with a NOW chapter president falsely claiming rape. You’ve been presented with a feminist claiming that men “benefit” from being falsely accused.
I wish I knew what your agenda is here. I really hope you’re not defending these people. Honestly, for anybody who is serious about doing something about rape these women are an embarassment.
Robert – two polite instances of “would you like to go out to dinner?” isn’t what I’m talking about. I’m talking about the cases where someone is told “I’m not interested” from the get-go and yet they somehow manage to interpret that as the not-interested person just being coy. That and the cases of “I broke up with you two years ago, and now I’m about to get married to someone else, so why are you still drunk-dialling me at 3 am to tell me how you think that we’re destined to be together?”. That’s often portrayed as the guy in question being a hopeless romantic, whereas in fact it’s just creepy and kind of pathetic.
Why do people use the term “hopeless romantic” as if it was a good and admirable thing anyway?
OK, derailment over.
Could you use post numbers to remind me where these things were presented? Thanks.
220
BritGirlSF:
I didn’t say that.
You said “feminists.” plural, as in “feminists make up rape stories.” But your one example is of a single feminist who was accused but not convicted. Even if Nall is guilty (and if she is, then what she did was disgusting and reprehensible), it hardly represents a norm for feminists.
And what that college administrator said was indeed inexcusable and loathsome. But, again, hardly typical.
Gwallan:
If the messenger has a record of bias and distortion like Fox News, then it deserves to be shot. Since there is a real story here, there was nothing to stop you from quoting a reputable source.
A cursory search didn’t turn up any references to Desiree Nall being convicted. Presumably the case is still pending. That would make her an alleged false reporter.
Your claim “You’ve been presented with a NOW chapter president falsely claiming rape” therefore doesn’t stand, since all we have is an allegation to that effect. Mendy’s original remark “I don’t know any woman that has made up a rape story for political gain” still stands, though if “know” is construed as “know of”, then it is now surely tottering.
I’m not convinced that she did say these things. I’ve not seen an unabridged version of the Time Magazine article. The quote comes in several different versions, presumably representing different edits of the same article. All are from antifeminist sources, while the journalist who wrote the article also appears to be negative towards his interview subjects. Much of the most reprehensible sentiments expressed were not direct quotes, but the journalist’s own words.
That definitely isn’t the same ruling I read, though it may be a different ruling the same case. Can you substantiate the claim that he was “set up”?
Calling him the “30 second rapist” is deceptive, because it implied that he continued for only 30 seconds after being told to stop. However, if you read the judgement, 30 seconds was the time within which it was ruled that he must come to understand that she was no longer consenting. It was because he continued for longer that he was convicted.
Without commenting further on that case, I agree that 30 seconds is more than enough time for someone to stop in the face of a clear withdrawl of consent.
In the context of this discussion, I now think the movie “The Graduate” is extremely creepy.
Lee–I came to that conclusion a long time ago, and I haven’t even seen the movie.
Imagynne – They showed it on a local cable channel last week, and I absolutely hated it. It was never my favorite movie (I haven’t seen it in 15 years), but this time I really thought it was too weird.
“Honestly, for anybody who is serious about doing something about rape these women are an embarassment”
Compared to the embarrassment posed by a man who forces his penis into a woman’s body?
“…men falsely accused of rape can benefit from the experience. Upon reflection, they may come to understand what they must have done to upset the woman. As for the distress caused men by false accusations, she reveals “it is not a pain I would necessarily have spared them.” Vassar College. Assistant Dean of Students ““ Catherine Comin
“it is not a pain I would necessarily have spared them.” How gracious of her. ”
In regards to this and to the premise of the thread, I ask: why are men immune to the socializing aspects of rape? Is rape only a tool to be used against women and children, shaping their socialization in what gets passed off as a normative experience? A man was asked to leave his airline seat; other men face workplace difficulties. And? How is that worse than women whose freedom to move around in public spaces is curtailed by threats of rape and by being female in a rape culture? How is that different or more shocking than women who can’t ride public transit, for fear of rape, to their 2nd or 3rd shift jobs and so therefore must pay for child support so they can work the 1st shift? How is that different than women being denied roles in military combat b/c they might be raped.
Give me a break guys. Buck up a little and change the culture. Is your freedom curtailed by rape? Good. Then you should understand us just that much better.
Q Grrl:
In the context within which gwallan made his remark, yes.
A comparible situation would be where a prominant MRA was alleged or proven to have forced his penis into a woman’s body.
… I’m wondering how many of the guys out there that would claim this treatment as discrimination still wank off to porn. I mean, do you really think you can objectify women and children and *not* have any of it come back at you?
Daran: you miss my point. The small fraction of women who make false rape claims pales next to the number of men who actually rape. Why should I be embarrassed about a woman that makes a false claim — unless you’re saying that b/c one woman lied, all women are liars. Is this what you mean to imply?
A comparable situation for you to think about is this: women get raped by men everyday. Once in a while a woman files a false rape charge. Deal with it.
So, in other words, “our problems are much worse than yours, so we needn’t discuss the validity of your concerns until our perceived problems are solved first.”
Have I got that right?
Q Grrl:
I think you miss mine.
I am unaware of any data at all addressing the question of how many women make false rape claims. (by which I mean any claim, not necessarily a police report, by a woman that a rape happened, where none did.) Rather, when women are surveyed, it appears that they are assumed to be 100% honest, which seems unjustifiable given the following:
There is some evidence (Kanin, etc.) that roughly half of all rape reports made by women to to police are false. I consider this it to be pitifully weak, and therefore inconclusive, but I know of no evidence at all to contradict it.
If you do, and you can cite, then I would be very interested.
Of course not, and it’s getting a bit tiresome to have this thrown at me when I have addressed the point on many occasions, for example here. (It’s a long post, read the second half), and I have within this very thread reminded people not to presume the woman concerned guilty unless and until she’s convicted. A correct statement of what I believe is that some women who claim to have been raped are lying, and I don’t know what the proportion is.
You have no reason to be embarrassed at a false rape report merely because you are the same sex as the false reporter. You have cause to be embarrassed if both you and she are supporters of a movement which preaches that “women don’t lie about rape”.
Aside from the fact that you have no basis for claiming that false rape charges are filed “once in a while”, Your language is prejudicial. You attribute rapes to “men”, which implies collective action, but false charges to “a women” as an individual.
Rape in this culture is a collective action; that’s why you guys get to complain about having to switch airplane seats. No? If rape were not so pervasive and collective vis-a-vis complicity, men wouldn’t be so suspect.
QGrrl:
I can see this as another way of saying that we live in a rape culture, or as a way of saying that all men are complicit in the act of rape whether or not they rape.
I’m not sure I agree with your statement. Complicity implies a partnership. And in most partnerships “all parties” are aware of the activities of the partnership. I don’t see my husband as being complicit in rape. I can accept his male privilege, but he doesn’t condone rape nor is he complicit in its perpetration.
But then again, I’m one of the odd women that was not socialized to fear men, rape, or the other things that most women in the US have been.
I don’t have a problem with someone, man or woman, being asked to switch seats in a plane. I would have problems if they were asked to switch sections, so that the unescorted child could have all of first class to theirselves for example. But, essentially this is less about phobias about men and more about financial liablility for the airlines. In all honesty though, I don’t think I would allow my children to fly unescorted until they were old enough to fend for themselves. But, that’s just me.
Gwallan, your ‘evidence’ amounts to anecdotes and self pity. studies tell you this and studies tell you that. Which ones? Where?
women when I have significant problems from being raped by a woman?
Why do I have to give a fuck about you anyway? You don’t like women. You hate feminists. You’ll go run and whine to your SYG buddies. Why don’t they take care of you? I’m not your mother. Neither is any other feminist. Men like you haven’t done shit for women and in fact actively try and keep us down.
Where are the feminists agitating against sexual abuse by women?
You’ve got to be fucking kidding me. You know, when OJ actually catches the real killers, I’ll get right on that.
Why can I get counselling because my mother was raped but not because I was?
Because your fellow male trolls don’t want to help you? Because you want the people who have no power and all the repsonsiblity to help you? Because you think you’re first amongst victims? Because you think being a male victim makes you more special than a woman victim?
Why is it that I was a “lucky little boy”, particularly according to women, because I “got some” when I was eight? You tell me.
I can’t tell you shit because frankly, your behavior and attitude have not demonstrated any honesty at all. You act like you hate women. I don’t owe you anything. WAnt help? Go get those MRAs to help you. After all, they’re the ones on your side, aren’t they? Aren’t they the ones who are sincerely trying to help male victims? Well, where are they now?
Basically our culture is not prepared to accept that women can transgress.
This is just complete and utter bullshit. Tell that to Andrea Yates. Tell that to any woman who’s gotten nailed for what her hubbie did to her kids. Hell, look at you. You’re blaming all women for whatever happened to you and you don’t think there’s anything wrong with that. Let a woman hint at the collective responsibility of men for the actions of men—whcih they condone—and she’s a ball busting bitch.
Therefore we assume that it’s only men who can’t be trusted.
Bullshit. Men rape. Men rape in huge numbers all across the planet. You haven’t displayed any knowledge or awareness of that. IN fact, you give the impression it doesn’t matter to you. Only you matters to you. You’re special, aren’t you?
Anyone who believes that feminism hasn’t played a part in this isn’t being honest with themselves.
I’m proud of it. Before feminsm, men raped everyone and got away with it. Now some of them get caught. Cry me a fuckin’ river. Better yet go to your little buddies at SYG and tell more lies about feminists.
Pingback: Red Harvest
In response to comment 249 (Ginmar. I won’t quote any of it)
This has to be the most repellent post I’ve seen on Alas. :-(((
I’m not convinced that you’re in any way odd, but regardless of that, in what way does your lack of fear have any bearing upon whether your husband in particular or non-raping men in general are “complicit”?
No it is not. Men did not get together and decide to rape women. Rapists do not consult with men in general about whether to commit rape. Being male is not a voluntary act.
This is nothing but an excuse for feminists to blame all men for what most men do not do.
Feminism, on the other hand, is a collective action. Membership is voluntary and when you announce to the world that you are a feminist, you are in essence endorsing all that feminism has to say.
Q Grrl:
This is nothing to do with wanking off to porn.
“Feminism, on the other hand, is a collective action. Membership is voluntary and when you announce to the world that you are a feminist, you are in essence endorsing all that feminism has to say. ”
Psst, there are different branches & schools of thought within feminism. Pass it on.
Yes I know. That doesn’t contradict what I just said.
Just what part of “endorsing all” is not contradicted by “different branches & schools of thought”?
To me, if you say “when you announce to the world that you are a feminist, you are in essence endorsing all that feminism has to say,” that means endorsing everything all branches of feminism say. But that’s nonsense, because some of the particulars are contrary.
Cathy Young is a self-identified feminist; if I say “I’m a feminist,” does that mean I endorse all Cathy Young says?
I’m not trying to be thick or obnoxious; I honestly don’t understand what it is you’re trying to say, Daran.
You put it better than I did. And even more intriguingly, if Cathy Young calls herself a feminist, does that mean she endorses everything you say?
I think that everyone who calls themself a “feminist” agrees to a certain core set of beliefs. That core set is pretty darn small, and it isn’t particularly objectionable even to hardened reactionaries like me – thus, it’s also pretty bloody useless. “Women ought to get the same or similar opportunities as men”, that sort of thing.
All the interesting stuff happens out on the periphery of that core – and the stuff on the periphery is where there are huge disagreements, Daran. Occasionally you get a near-consensus on something new – but even then you’ve always got outliers saying “but…”
It really isn’t workable to paint Ampersand with an Alsis-soaked brush. Plus, it would take days to get it off, and then he wouldn’t ink new Herevilles for my entertainment.
Not that he does anyway.
Feminist bastard.
God, I’m either getting more conservative or Robert is getting more liberal or we’ve both gone insane, because I agreed with everything he wrote there. Nice summing up, Robert.
Especially the part about Amp being a big slacker who needs to ink more Herevilles for us.
:-D
—Myca
Oops – the statement I attributed to Daran actually came from Myce or Mendy (which I should have known from the content). Sorry.
Myca:
You’re not insane. I’ve wondered about the same thing.
Daran:
I missed the fact that Quentin was already banned. I haven’t read all the comments at the time. To get back on what we were discussing:
First of all, don’t mind my pedantic corrections.
Second:
I’d rather descibe myself as supportive to feminism (the terms are too much of a mixed baggage. By a broad definition I certainly am a feminist) . And I think the accusations about derailment usually don’t come out of blue, usually there is a derailment. Just like there was a derailment here.
Now, about the original article: I also think this is about the negative perceptions about male sexuality. Anashi pointed out that men who take care of children get huge praise from women. I think this is true for some men. If a high-status man, or a married man, willingly ‘lowers’ himself to doing women’s work for a while, certainly he is going to get huge praise for being so unselfish. But this is simply untrue for men, who have low status or are single. Indeed, men who aren’t that are sometimes viewed as being creeps if they express a view of liking children. I know that I’ve gotten (perhaps because I’m single) dirty looks when I have confessed that the few times I’ve spent with children have been generally surprisingly pleasant experiences (perhaps the looks were because I tend to be introverted and thus people would find it hard to believe that I could tolerate children, and thus my motives are suspect), and outright scowl when I told I was impressed by the maturity of a certain 5 year old girl. The context of me being impressed was the fact the said girl had defeated me on “find the pairs” -card game, which isn’t a small feat (I never lose on purpose and am quite good at the said game. And no, it wasn’t just luck). Of course, I don’t think my rights were violated by dirty looks. But it made me wonder.
Clarification: I don’t think there should be seperate men’s work and women’s work. I meant that there is a pervasive view that says otherwise, and usually it is “women’s work” that is devalued, despite the fact that much of it is quite important for society.
Daran Writes: This has to be the most repellent post I’ve seen on Alas. :-(((
Then you’ve missed an awful lot of comments, including one from a man who wanted to assure himself that it wasn’t rape if he just pinned his girlfriend down and went ahead with having sex when she changed her mind at the last minute.
If you want to argue that any part of Ginmar’s post was especially repellent, you’re going to need to quote it and make your case: broadly claiming that all of it was repellant to you
– including such plain statements of fact as “Men rape. Men rape in huge numbers all across the planet.” or (in response to your profoundly ignorant claim that Basically our culture is not prepared to accept that women can transgress.): This is just complete and utter bullshit. Tell that to Andrea Yates. Tell that to any woman who’s gotten nailed for what her hubbie did to her kids. –
then you’re saying something about yourself, not about Ginmar: you’re saying it’s repellent to you to have it plainly stated that men commit more and worse crimes of violence than women do, including rape, but that women get blamed more if they do commit a crime of violence. If you’re saying that the whole of Ginmar’s comment is indistinguishably repellent to you, you’re only saying that you hate having to read ugly facts about men.
No it is not. Men did not get together and decide to rape women. Rapists do not consult with men in general about whether to commit rape.
And this is plain nonsense. Yes, men do get together and decide to rape women: and yes, the culture that we both live in is a pro-rape culture: is one in which men get to rape and get away with it, because rape is perceived, by collective mechanisms such as jokes and dirty stories, such as verdicts that acquit a man of rape under most circumstances, as a sexual act that women want.
Robert: That core set is pretty darn small, and it isn’t particularly objectionable even to hardened reactionaries like me – thus, it’s also pretty bloody useless. “Women ought to get the same or similar opportunities as men”, that sort of thing.
Actually, we generally find that when these core set of principles are carried out in reality, sexist bigots (who frequently refer to themselves as “hardened reactionaries”, I suppose because it sounds nicer to themselves to think of themselves as “conservative” rather than just plain anti-women) who may indeed have expressed a general belief in the principle that women ought to have the same/similiar opportunities as men, actually recoil in horror and spend a lot of time arguing why it’s not fair.
Darran:
My own lack of fear doesn’t speak at all to the idea of all men being “complicit” in rape. It was a secondary thought outside the main idea of the previous paragraph.
I can accept that we live in a culture that is supportive of rape through its media and certian societal norms, but societal norms do not make all men “complicit” in all rapes. Because, I’ve heard many women make jokes about “He’ll meet Bubba in prison” and certain other kinds of jokes that maintain and reinforce rape culture, as well. ( I hope that makes sense. I’m still working on my first cup of coffee.)
Jesu and Ginmar, please cool it down a little.
Daran, if you don’t want to try rebutting Ginmar’s comments, then please don’t comment on them at all. A general “this is repulsive” comment, without any content, is not useful.
Elinor accused you – correctly – of making straw man arguments.
In no way does “you’re making a straw man argument” mean “shut up.”
Ampersand said:
I think the problem isn’t with “male caregivers” in general, I think it is with “single men who are not parents” as caregivers.
Single men, or men without children of their own, aren’t supposed to want to be around children unless there is something wrong with them. Married men, or single fathers, who spend time with children or who choose careers that involve children are from what I have seen generally regarded as “good guys”. They are praised for their efforts, they get bonus points for doing the same things women do all the time. It is men who do not have children of their own who are suspect when they show any interest in being around kids. The general feeling I get from hearing folks talk is that if single men/non fathers really liked kids [in a non predatory way], they would get married, have kids of their own. That they don’t is considered evidence that they “like” kids in a bad way. On the other hand, single women and women who are not mothers are encouraged to spend time with children, to take up careers in childcare. The reasoning is that it is “good practice” for when they decide to have kids of their own. It is a really odd double standard. If it is “good practice” for possible future mothers, why isn’t it “good practice” for possible future fathers? I would think that if two people have kids, it would be in the best interest of the children if both parties had experience being around and taking care of children.
No it is not. Men did not get together and decide to rape women.
Christ, do you live under rock, or what? Yes, in fact they do. Gang rape on campus is a serious phenomina and it’s all about rich white boys planning to rape women. Peggy Reeves Sanday is an anthropologist who’s studied gang rape for decades. Go read her. You now have no excuse for your ignorance.
Rapists do not consult with men in general about whether to commit rape. Being male is not a voluntary act.
Like, OMG, you just hate me because I’m a man! U said all men are rapists!
Men rape. Other men excuse it. Other men, like you, find it so disgusting to even talk about that when a mere woman dares to throw it in your face that men rape, you make excuses. Your ignorance, at this point, amounts to lying about women. So many men make excuses for rape, for the men who rape, that few men get convicted of it. That’s consulting after the fact.
This is nothing but an excuse for feminists to blame all men for what most men do not do.
Yeah, most men don’t rape? Really? How do you know this, O Expert on Women’s Lives? Yeah, well, so many men–like you, for example—are in denial about rape that you let rapists get away with it. Then you bitch at feminsts for getting angry about ignorance.
Feminism, on the other hand, is a collective action. Membership is voluntary and when you announce to the world that you are a feminist, you are in essence endorsing all that feminism has to say.
Yeah, men don’t get together–say, the whiners at SYG, or whatever—and plan to troll. Men don’t swarm feminist sites and say the same fucking thing over and over again. Oh, no. But feminists all march in lockstep.
I got news for you, babe. There’s lots of different kinds of feminists out there. I just happen to the kind that refuses to take lying shit from trolls.
Contextomy undone:
ginmar:
Me:
ginmar:
Jesurgislac:
You are both committing a fallacy of amphiboly. In ginmar’s remark at top, “collective action” can only refer to a collective of men in general. It can not refer to groups of men committing gang-rape, since this is not true for “rape” in general which includes all rapes, not just gang-rapes.
My reply, which used “men” in the sense of “men in general” is clearly responsive to ginmar’s comment. However both of your responses are only true if “men” means “groups of men”. I agree that when groups of men (or indeed any group of people: read this post and weep) commit rape then this is collective action by the members of those groups.
However this does not contradict my remarks, or support ginmar’s original claim.
Me (repeating a little to preserve context):
ginmar (from now on):
I assume you are not accusing me (Daran) of hating you (ginmar) because you are a man, or suggesting that I (Daran) said all men are rapists. Rather the rhetorical content of the above is that you are claiming that this is my interpretation of your position. (When rhetoric gets this involved, it becomes very hard to respond to.)
You have not said (to my recollection) that all men are rapists. You attribute collective responsibility for rape to men in general, i.e., to all men. I understand the difference between “all men are rapists” and “all men are responsible for rape”. I don’t agree with either proposition.
I don’t know whether you hate me because I’m a man. Your post 249 appears to express hatred at gwallan because he’s a man. You don’t appear to love me.
Amphiboly.
I”ve made no excuses for rape. None at all. I blame rapists for rape, and I hold people responsible for what they do and say, and for what they refrain from doing or saying. What I do not do, unlike you, is blame anyone for rape solely on the basis of how the genetic dice fell in their particular case.
I suggest that there are in fact two reasons why so few men are convicted of rape. One is that it may be the case that a substantial proportion of rape complaints are false. I’m necessarily tentative about that because the evidence (Kanin etc.) is insufficient to sustain a firmer statement. On the other hand, there is no evidence at all, that I’m aware of, to suggest that false rape reports are rare. The belief that they are seems to be entirely a matter of faith.
The second reason is that there is no forensic test for consent. Consequently it is difficult for genuine complainants to make the necessary showing of proof beyond reasonable doubt.
If you claim otherwise, then I suggest that the burden of proof is on you.
[snip content-free ad hom]
As far as I can see on man planned to troll, and got cought, but yes, men’s right’s activism as a movement is a collective action, so my remarks apply equally to those who subscribe to it. I don’t.
You’re pretty repetitive yourself.
I didn’t say that either.
[remaining ad hom] snipped.
I saw your comment before your edit. Thank you for recognising that I have not been ‘heated’.
With respect, sometimes a point by point refutation misses the point. ginmar’s remarks were pure hate-speech and should be called as such. Indeed if you substituted “blacks” for “men” and “whites” for “women” the result – both the argument and the rhetoric – would not seem out of place in alt.flame.niggers.
Nevertheless, I will address Jesurgislac’s apology point by point, which I hope will suffice.
Ginmar:
Again, please try to take the tone of contempt down several notches. If you can’t stand the norms of posting here, then don’t post here.
I agree that “most men don’t rape.”
Mary Koss’ study found that about 5% of men have committed rape (although most of that 5% don’t consider what they did to be rape). Although 5% is a lot of men, that still leaves 95% who have not committed rape. (I discussed this further in this post.)
Also, most studies (including Koss’) seem to find that about 10-15% of women are raped at some point in their lives. It would be difficult to comprehend this finding if over 50% of men are rapists.
I blame rapists for rape, and I hold people responsible for what they do and say, and for what they refrain from doing or saying.
But you don’t want to be held responsible for your argument that it’s “only a matter of faith” that women willing to testify in court that a man raped them aren’t mostly lying? You don’t want to be blamed for claiming that women are more likely to lie than men are to rape?
Amp, when you let poisonous little women-haters like this comment freely on your blog, don’t tell women who respond in the same vein to him to “cool it”.
Jesu, you’re not responding in the same vein – you’re escalating. For instance, Daran has never called you or any other poster here “a poisonous little women-hater,” nor any similar personal insult.
Look, don’t post here if you can’t stand my rules. I like and respect you, but this is my website, and I’m not convinced that it’s unreasonable of me to ask posters to attack the arguments, rather than attacking the other posters.
However, unless it’s the case that blacks are to whites as men are to women, I don’t think that’s a meaningful comparison. All it really proves is that changing the words changes the meaning.
(I realize that “what if this were about blacks” is a common rhetorical technique used by people on all sides of these debates. But just because it’s common doesn’t make it good.)
Well it is, isn’t it? Feel free to post your evidence if you claim otherwise.
No I don’t, because I have never made such a claim. What I tentatively claim is that women make false rape reports to the police about as often as they do true ones. The claim is tentative because the evidence is insufficient to support a firmer claim. But it is at least an evidence-based claim.
It’s not even what I believe. What I believe is that I don’t know what proportion of rape claims are false. The evidence is insufficient to form a belief.
I have also pointed out that the integrity of survey data depends upon the assumption that survey subjects invariably or at least overwhelmingly tell the truth. That seems to me to be an inherently unlikely proposition, but this doesn’t mean I claim that any particular percentage are false. certainly any attempt to extrapolate from an already dubious “about as often” of the self-selecting population of rape reporters into a random sample of survey subjects would be ridiculous.
Daran, I think that the claim that “women make false rape reports to the police about as often as they do true ones.” Is sufficiently extraordinary so as to require extraordinary evidence.
Mainly, it contradicts my common sense. Of course, all sorts of things happen that go against my common sense, (the earth circles around the sun?!? Pshhh! Please, I can see the sun moving. Try again.) but I usually need some pretty solid evidence before I believe them either.
In this case it beggars my credulity to think that a full half of the rape cases reported are reported falsely (and maliciously, through lies). I understand that this isn’t a claim you’re actually making, and that you simply believe that we really don’t know what percentage of rape accusations are false, but you’ve made reference a few times to there being some evidence for the ‘half the time’ claim, so I’d like to take a look at it. I mean, some evidence is better than none, right?
—Myca
Daran: No I don’t, because I have never made such a claim.
What I tentatively claim is that women make false rape reports to the police about as often as they do true ones.
So, as a matter of faith, you want to believe that women lie about rape at least as often as they tell the truth? Got any actual evidence for this, or is it just something you so desperately want to believe, rather than the evidence in front of you that men commit rape far more often than they’re convicted for it? And part of the reason is that so many men, like you, want to believe that when men have sex with women without their consent, it’s not really rape, because the women who say they didn’t consent are probably lying.
Ampersand:
What it proves is that changing the words changes how you feel about them. You recognise hate-speech directed at blacks – you get an emotional jolt, at least I do, same as I get one when you read hate-speech directed at women. Yet for some reason, you don’t get such a jolt when it’s directed at men, while I do.
Doesn’t make it bad either. The arguments are essentially the same, the rhetoric is the same, the counterarguments that I’ve been making are the same, and the counter-counterarguments – the strawmen and ad-homs that are being directed at me – are essentially the same.
So what’s the difference?
So, Amp, I guess those 5% rapists just exist in a vacuum.
Daran, you said it all when you said you believe that women are just as likely to falsely as accurately report rape.
I’ve had it with the fucking trolls and half-assed feminism. You don’t me to be pissed off? Try rising above the luke warm defense, and the troll coddling. I’m done.
You’ve been implying that men know rapists and give them a pass.
I don’t know any rapists. Perhaps I should start asking my male friends, “Hey, are you a rapist?”
Just want to be sure I know how to do my part.
Straw man. I don’t believe that, and I never said anything of the sort.
If something in the range of the 5% figure is correct, then it’s extremely unlikely that you don’t know any rapists. A more accurate statement is that you probably know rapists, but you don’t know that they’re rapists.
I don’t appreciate your mocking tone, by the way. If you can’t manage to address other posters respectfully, then please leave.
Me:
Jesurgislac:
This is getting boring. I’ll happily defend my arguments, but if you insist on setting up strawmen, I’ll leave you to fight them by yourself. I said “about as often” not “at least as often”. Evidence for this is here (PDF). Yes the sample is pitifully small, and yes it is unrepresentative. That’s why I keep on saying “tentative”. You, by contrast have no evidence at all to contradict it. Please prove me wrong.
The evidence in front of me consists of Justice Department statistics on the number of rape convictions and survey data concerning the number of people claiming to have been raped. I say that the former should be reliable, but that the integrity of the latter depends upon the assumption that respondant are overwhelmingly honest. Do you disagree? If so, please explain either how this is not an assumption, or how the data can be reliable if substantial numbers are not telling the truth. The third alternative, I suppose, is to hurl abuse and strawmen at me.
A strawman, an ad-hom, and pretty damned offensive to boot.
One in 20. That’s a shocking figure. And when I think of how many men I know, through work and church, it’s a startling number of potential rapists.
But I have no idea how I would find out who is and who isn’t. So what would you suggest I do with that statistic?
Daran, my view of complicity is somewhat like this: I had bad cramps last night and sat on the sofa watching Law & Order: SVU. The entire episode was dedicated to the story of a rapist and his release from prison and his subsequent attempt to rape a teenage girl. It even involved a heavy element of male complicity through the role of the undercover cop who was his new “buddy.”
This is primetime entertainment in the USA. This is what complicity looks like. This is turning a crime against women into entertainment, possibly to be ingested along with your beer or popcorn.
Complicity also looks like this: when men feel comfortable in their outrage at being inconvenienced vis-a-vis the fallout from the rape culture that they can call certain actions discriminatory. Very often these same men do not 1) understand the concept of male privilege 2) argue vehemently that we do not live in a rape culture 3) that feminists claim all men are rapists and 4) think that what women term “fear of rape” is a fear that reduces women to hysteria, when in fact it is the type of fear that causes women to make decisions on a daily basis, that when men have to make those same decisions, men get to call it discrimination. That is complicity.
Complicity also looks like this: access to porn as a protected free speech right while calling the fallout from objectifying women and children discrimination.
The issue is not so clear cut as to say that *some* men rape and *some* men abuse/rape children. The issue for me is that a huge banner can roll across a blog that announces: Bigotry Against Men in Childcare. The irony is too full for me to swallow. That statement alone can be interpreted to mean: women have a legit right to complain about men who rape and abuse, but if they take concrete action… well that’s just being unfair to men and constitutes discriminatory practices. That is the complicity, right there, of men in our rape culture. Men might tentatively agree we live in a rape culture, but the truth comes out when women make choices that would safegaurd themselves or children against male predatory practices. And then men will also say, “but not all men do this.” Which is really such a weak thing to say. You’re asking women to ignore everything they see, experience, know or intuit and trust men blindly (completely contrary to thousands of years of cold hard fact), just so that men don’t feel insulted or discriminated against. You’re basically holding your desire for a clear conscience as a greater need then women establishing boundaries that work for them. And then you blame the feminists on top of that — because they are the women that are most obviously agitating that you conscience is a pittance compared to women’s safety, be that mental, physical, or emotional.
My favorite bumpersticker years ago was “Silence is the voice of complicity.” When men can claim injury from rape society but not recognize their role in its maintenance, then what we have is complicity.
Myca:
Upon what do you base this “common sense” view?
Let’s start with your “common sense” view. How many rape reports have you personally verified to be true? How many have you verified to be false? Do you think this is a sufficiently representative sample to draw any common sense conclusions about the frequency of false rape reports? If not, then upon what do you base this common sense view on?
My guess is that is based upon nothing more than having been told it, time and time again: That is, after all, how we know 99.99% of everything. Is matter made up of atoms? Yep. Have either of us verified this for ourselves? Probably not. I know I haven’t.
But what if that “fact” were bogus? What if, it were merely echoed and reechoed within feminist sources, but turned out to be based on nothing substantial whatsoever? This paper (PDF) documents how the 2% myth propagated from a single unsubstantiated source.
About half the time. 41% in the Police dataset, 50% in the other University dataset mention in the footnote. See my reply to Jesurgislac for the URL.
Daran, the FBI beleives that about 8% of rape reports to police are false, according to this article (although I’m unclear if “false,” in this context, means deliberate lies or if it’s including “unfounded” rapes, which may include real rapes without any supporting evidence).
I think that’s evidence in support of Jesu’s position.
Q Grrl and Bean, excellent, excellent posts. Thank you.
Here are some suggestions.
Is it common to subject people filing charges to polygraph tests? Does that happen to alleged mugging victims? I’d never heard of this practice before.
And the sample isn’t just _small_. It’s disturbing. If only 109 rapes are reported over a period of _nine years_, then there are probably rapes going unreported.
I work in childcare. I don’t provide it, but I arrange it. What you need to understand is that our primary concern is making sure these people’s loved ones are cared for, and they need to feel comfortable. I’ve yet to encounter any parent who doesn’t freak out completely over the possibility of a male care giver. And who are we to force them to have someone in their home, caring for their child, when they do not feel safe having that person care for their child?
Homophobia isn’t the reason. The reason is that the overwhelming majority of child molesters and rapists are male. This is an undisputable fact. To expect people to ignore that, particularly when it comes to their loved ones, is completely unreasonable.
>>I’ve yet to encounter any parent who doesn’t freak out completely over the possibility of a male care giver. And who are we to force them to have someone in their home, caring for their child, when they do not feel safe having that person care for their child?>>
Setting everything else aside for the moment….Who are you? You’re an employer. That means that the comfort of your clients is not the only factor.
I didn’t say I was an employer. I said I arrange for care. I’m in fact not an employer, and yes, the comfort of my clients IS the most important factor.
>>I didn’t say I was an employer. I said I arrange for care. I’m in fact not an employer, and yes, the comfort of my clients IS the most important factor. >>
Yes, you arrange for care by contacting care providers and telling them about opportunities to provide their services in exchange for a paycheck. You obtain jobs for people. You have an ethical responsibility not to discriminate. _That_ is an important factor. Moreover, “Don’t blame me! Blame my clients!” is not a valid justification.
Piny, it sounds like oracle is a broker, not an employer. It’s perhaps a narrow difference, but oracle doesn’t give anybody jobs – the clients give people the job. He/she is an information source. The ethical responsibility of non-discrimination, whatever that may be, falls on the people employing the day care, not their agent.
Daran: This is getting boring. I’ll happily defend my arguments, but if you insist on setting up strawmen, I’ll leave you to fight them by yourself. I said “about as often” not “at least as often”. Evidence for this is here (PDF). Yes the sample is pitifully small, and yes it is unrepresentative. That’s why I keep on saying “tentative”. You, by contrast have no evidence at all to contradict it. Please prove me wrong.
Daran, the paper by Edward Greer that you keep citing as if it proved your absurd claim that you think half the women who report rape claims are lying is a paper explicitly attacking feminism and feminist views on rape. Greer plainly shares your low opinion of women, and high opinion of men, and Greer doesn’t want to think that women tell the truth. (His data appears to be race-related: judging by the 32 hits he gets on scholar.google, his field is primarily race relations.) Greer’s women-hating attitude is obviously very popular with MRAs, but if you can’t come up with anything better, you’re essentially doing no more than repeat the ancient bigotry of men: “women lie”.
Let’s start with your “common sense” view. How many rape reports have you personally verified to be true? How many have you verified to be false? Do you think this is a sufficiently representative sample to draw any common sense conclusions about the frequency of false rape reports? If not, then upon what do you base this common sense view on?
How many rape reports have you personally verified to be false? How many have you verified to be true? Is this new fantasy of yours solely based on having discovered this paper by Edward Greer and liking his idea that women lie so much you’ve adopted it for your own personal faith?
But what if that “fact” were bogus? What if, it were merely echoed and reechoed within feminist sources, but turned out to be based on nothing substantial whatsoever? This paper (PDF) documents how the 2% myth propagated from a single unsubstantiated source.
Yes – that’s all pure Greer-ism. You haven’t got an original faith, even – you’ve just found this paper and you like it, so you’re running with it because it suits you to believe that women lie.
I said: And part of the reason is that so many men, like you, want to believe that when men have sex with women without their consent, it’s not really rape, because the women who say they didn’t consent are probably lying.
Daran: A strawman, an ad-hom, and pretty damned offensive to boot.
Crap. It’s precisely your argument: you’ve been making it ever since you stumbled across Edward Greer’s paper. You want to believe that women who say they didn’t consent are lying: you’ve been claiming that in comment after comment. Of course it’s offensive: why do you think the feminists on this thread are all so angry with you? Because it’s offensive to all women when you claim that in your opinion half the women who report rapes to the police were lying.
“The evidence in front of me consists of Justice Department statistics on the number of rape convictions and survey data concerning the number of people claiming to have been raped. I say that the former should be reliable, but that the integrity of the latter depends upon the assumption that respondant are overwhelmingly honest. ”
If nobody is convicted of a murder does that mean it never happened?
There was a study done a while ago (on college campuses, IIRC) where men were asked a range of questions, including “Have you ever raped a woman?” – to which the affirmative responses were very small. However. There were also other questions in the survey, not including the actual word “rape”, in which men were asked if they done things like continued having sex after the woman had indicated she wanted to stop, if they believed that buying a woman dinner entitled them to an expectation of sex afterwards, etc etc. There were many more Yes answers to those questions.
Scarbo: But I have no idea how I would find out who is and who isn’t.
You could ask them questions. “Do you think it’s rape if your girlfriend says no but you know if you keep asking her, she’ll eventually give in?” – “Do you think it’s rape if you meet a woman at a party and she’s dancing with you and you take her home and she asks you up for coffee and then she says no, but you go ahead and have sex with her anyway?” – “Do you think it’s rape if she’s too drunk to say yes or no?” – “Do you think it’s rape if she changes her mind when you’re both naked and you’re erect?”
Of course, you probably wouldn’t want to go to that kind of trouble and embarrassment, and would rather keep on associating with rapists.