[RD] Feminism

[Akka]

The human brain is always changing, a 40 year old is more different from a 25 year old than a 25 year old is from a 19 year old. I think rapists should get minimum 25 years and also lose a ball (so if you rape twice you can't rape thrice).

That would put rape above murder as a crime, which would be really insane (unless you support immediate execution for all murderer, but then the justice system would be rather draconian wouldn't it ?).

 

[Plotinus]

In University terms, this is a 'soft science' or humanities, rather than hard science or STEM. Let me explain the difference. In STEM you have concrete things that can be proven or disproven. It is absolute. In humanities or 'soft' subjects, it is not like that.

That isn't correct, as anyone who's been subjected to peer review in the humanities can attest. A historian can establish to greater or lesser certainty whether something happened by examining the evidence, just as a scientist does. Some of the hard sciences can generate their own evidence by performing experiments, which creates greater certainty, but not all of them. E.g. palaeontologists can't conduct experiments, and their hypotheses about extinct life forms are necessarily subject to revision, just as historians' are, but they're still considered a hard science.

Plotinus, IIRC has a PhD from Oxford University in Philosophy. I'd like his opinion on whether rape or death should be considered worse. Not because he's a man, but because he has a PhD in Philosophy from what is arguably the most respected institution in the world.

My BA and M Phil are from Oxford - my PhD is from Singapore - not that that's really relevant (the PGR ranks Oxford second, not first, after New York). I don't know whether rape or death is worse because I've never experienced either, but my guess is that rape is worse because you're still there to experience it and suffer the after-effects. Death is probably worse for other people than it is for the person actually dying. There are also circumstances when we typically consider death to be a good thing, but there aren't any circumstances when we consider rape to be a good thing.

If you're asking whether murder is worse than rape, that's a different question. And I don't think it's really answerable because the reasons we think murder is bad are probably quite different from the reasons we think rape is bad. At any rate I think it will vary by case, since I can imagine both examples of rape that seem worse than murder and murder that seem worse than rape. But these are still just subjective opinions.

More generally I suppose I've spent enough time online by now not to be shocked at people actually claiming that there is no patriarchy and women are not subject to worse social disadvantages than men, and that feminism is some kind of anti-male movement which needs to be countered with a "men's rights" movement, but I still am.

 

[Ryika]

Not quite sure it was 100% bragging as he also talked about trying to cheat on his wife & being rejected in the same tape. He was just revealing himself, revealing himself as someone without sexual boundaries. Clearly he has self-esteem issues & feels that he needs money & power for women to put up with him.

That's probably true, yeah.

This is utter nonsense of course. In fact it is more likely to be the reverse: an accusation of rape is likely to destroy the accuser's life, particularly if the rapist is rich or powerful.

I would think one of us is living in Bizarro World, were it not for that last part of the sentence. I completely agree that, if you accuse a famous or rich person of rape, you're probably not going to have a good time. Well, that part about the rich person is true in the american context, it's not so much in Germany, but the part about the famous person? Totally agree with.

What you're ignoring is that the situation is completely different for "common people".

I mean, you just have to google to see some examples:

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-surrey-11676804
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/man-wrongly-accused-rape-said-7515309
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/lond...cked-by-a-false-rape-allegation-a3148651.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/thin...ocent-life-after-a-false-rape-accusation.html

Then you've got things like A rape on campus, where mattress girl made up a bs gang rape-story with tons of contradictions against a fraternity that was then targeted by violence and abuse.

I know, I know. "Anecdotal evidence!", right? Somehow that's always the answer when people are cited who give their personal experience that goes against the narrative. But those accounts should totally be taken into account when they support the narrative, eh?

There are tons of these cases, are you seriously claiming that for common people, if a woman accuses a man of rape, people turn on her, and not on him?

Ah, so I guess it's already time for your typical tactic of contorting and twisting arguments just to try and show that you're right?

Ah, so I guess it's already time for you to accuse me of twisting your argument to try to boost your position, isn't it?

Joking aside though, I'm not twisting anything, I'm not even saying you're wrong in most of the things you've said, quite the opposite, I've partly agreed with the things you said, and I fully acknowledge that you say that men can be the victims of sexism against them in a theoretical environment, and that you say that men are victims of sexism. What I disagree on is...

I have stated multiple times that men are also victims of sexism towards women. I have moreover stated that men can be victims of sexism towards men. However, I also argued that when men are victims of sexism towards women, it does not suddenly make the sexism not sexism towards women. Neither you nor the OP has addressed this issue of intentionality of sexism, instead merely playing the victim card (ironically) and repeatedly asserting that I don't acknowledge that men are victims too, which is demonstrably false.

...your assessment that the intentionality of sexism is that of women in this case.

Because it is 'sexism against men', not 'sexism against women that also has sexist consequences for men' (or however you'd phrase it).

It may have started as sexism against women, like I said, that may very well be the case. That does not change that over time, that attitude of sexism towards women also creates sexism towards men, sexism that then stands on its own and does no longer require the sexist attitude towards women to exist.

The expectation for men to take their role as the protectors does become a thing of its own the moment it gains traction. That's why it is perfectly possible to have a theoretical society where women are seen as equally strong and capable as men and men are still seen as the ones who have to defend them. Not on the basis that they're more capable of doing that, but because that's seen to be their role, as long as a country needs defenders - even if individual women don't need them - that role doesn't just evaporate.

That is, again, sexism against men, and you should call it that - not "Sexism against women that also has negative effects on men". You're completely ignoring the outcome, how the situation is now, and keep looking at the intention behind what it was in the past.

 

[Thorgalaeg]

@Plotinus, Paleontology is not considered hard science at all. It is a step below biology in the hardness ranking, and biology is not considered hard science either like physics or chemistry but something beetwen hard and soft. Ask Sheldon if you dont believe me.

 

[Plotinus]

@Plotinus, Paleontology is not considered hard science at all. It is a step below biology in the hardness ranking, and biology is not considered hard science either like physics or chemistry but something beetwen hard and soft. Ask Sheldon if you dont believe me.

Well he said "hard science or STEM", so I took it he was using the term "hard science" pretty widely. Because that includes engineering, and I'm sure Sheldon has an opinion about that too...

 

[Lemon Merchant]

I'll also add this: Lemon's Merchant's job only makes her MORE biased, not less biased. She only sees female rape victims and no one else. And only the ones who are devastated enough that they have to see her, at that.

If the only people she saw to counsel was the families of murder victims, she would probably be just as biased the other way.

I don't just counsel rape victims. I work with a wide variety of people on a seemingly endless array of issues, most of them to do with serious mental illnesses like bipolar disorder and Schizophrenia. I am not biased in either direction. I am simply reporting some anecdotal evidence based don my experience with women who have been sexually assaulted. That's all. I personally am not saying that death is worse than rape because I've never experienced rape first hand. I can only go by what some of these women tell me.

And since we're getting philosophical. I have a PhD too.

 

[Akka]

I don't know whether rape or death is worse because I've never experienced either, but my guess is that rape is worse because you're still there to experience it and suffer the after-effects.

So basically any bad experience in life is worse than death ?
I'm pretty disappointed, Plotinus, you've accustomed me to much, much better kind of reasoning than this :-/

 

[civver_764]

Yeah, sex with unconscious people isn't consensual.

According to Brock Turner, she fell asleep while they were having sex without him noticing.

 

[Plotinus]

Well, if death is non-existence, then it's neither good nor bad, and so any bad experience will be worse than it, and any good experience will be better than it. Or perhaps more accurately, they simply can't be compared, because non-existence isn't like anything, because it isn't anything at all. In which case asking what death is like is just the wrong question. Alternatively, if there is life after death, then we don't know what it's like and we can't answer the question at all. Or perhaps I've just been reading too much Lucretius.

It's all a bit off-topic anyway though. I'm still struggling to understand the OP's apparent belief that there's something wrong with teaching boys not to rape. I don't know what to say to the main issues at debate here because I would have thought civilised society moved past debating them decades ago.

 

[civver_764]

It's all a bit off-topic anyway though. I'm still struggling to understand the OP's apparent belief that there's something wrong with teaching boys not to rape. I don't know what to say to the main issues at debate here because I would have thought civilised society moved past debating them decades ago.

It sounds reasonable on the surface, but really it's a male-shaming tactic. For example, imagine if there were campaigns to "teach girls not falsely accuse boys" or "teach girls not to be gold-diggers". That would be a bit hurtful to females, wouldn't it? My objection is with the gendered nature of the campaign. Of course we should teach people that rape is bad, and we do. I've never met a single person that thinks rape is ok.

 

[Lexicus]

Well except the fact is that plenty of men do think rape is okay. They just don't think of it as rape.

 

[Ryika]

Ironically of course, the areas where it probably makes the most sense to educate men - refugees who are legitimately not familiar with the details of how women are meant to be treated in Europe - are generally seen as a negative thing. The point of view that it's pretty condescending towards them is (rightfully) brought up whenever that debate flames up again. I still remember many of the statements from feminists when Norway started doing that, heh.

I wouldn't be against "consent courses" if they were designed to actually give boys and girls the information they need for a healthy sexual life, but the information I've seen about them makes it look a lot like course where boys are told that they're likely to be rapists and that they have to re-affirm consent every 0.32 seconds to avoid being a predator, and girls are told nonsense like "If you didn't enjoy it during parts of the act, then you have been raped, even if at first you liked it and didn't give the boy any signals that you don't enjoy it anymore".

Those were hyperboles of course, but the attitudes are usually there, and that will do the exact opposite of what meant to be their goal.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

According to Brock Turner, she fell asleep while they were having sex without him noticing.

Sex with people who are in such a drunken stupor that you can't keep them awake even with vigorous physical activity isn't consensual.

 

[Plotinus]

It sounds reasonable on the surface, but really it's a male-shaming tactic. For example, imagine if there were campaigns to "teach girls not falsely accuse boys" or "teach girls not to be gold-diggers". That would be a bit hurtful to females, wouldn't it? My objection is with the gendered nature of the campaign. Of course we should teach people that rape is bad, and we do. I've never met a single person that thinks rape is ok.

And yet people do commit rape, and the vast majority of them are men. I don't see how telling boys not to commit rape is "male-shaming". It doesn't involve making anyone ashamed of their gender. It's perfectly reasonable to direct anti-rape education towards boys/men since they're the ones most likely to do it!

Rape is a far bigger problem in this world than false accusations of rape, let alone "gold-digging". So the analogy really doesn't hold.

The thing is, I agree with you that there are particular pressures and difficulties that men face and women don't. I think few people would deny that and I feel many of them myself. But women face more, and worse ones. Complaining about those few inequalities that disadvantage men as if they are equal in weight to the ones that disadvantage women is like white Americans complaining about how unfair positive discrimination is.

 

[civver_764]

I remember one time when my ex-girlfriend was drunk. We were getting into it and she kept trying to get me to agree to a threesome with my friend. I told her that made me super uncomfortable and shut down. She proceeded to shame the hell out of me "but I'm hornnyyyyyyyyy", "are you *beep* serious?" "why'd you get me so worked up for nothing?"

I've never even bothered to share that story until now because people would probably just laugh at me.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

I remember one time when my ex-girlfriend was drunk. We were getting into it and she kept trying to get me to agree to a threesome with my friend. I told her that made me super uncomfortable and shut down. She proceeded to shame the hell out of me "but I'm hornnyyyyyyyyy", "are you *beep* serious?" "why'd you get me so worked up for nothing?"

I've never even bothered to share that story until now because people would probably just laugh at me.

Not at all. But there is something to point out here.

You shut it down because it made you uncomfortable.

The question you might ask yourself is whether you would "shut down" something if it sounded good to you, but you knew (or thought probably) the girl would regret it in the sober light of morning.

 

[Ryika]

To me the much more interesting question is whether you would have considered it rape if he had made the moves she asked him to make.

After all, she was drunk.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

To me the much more interesting question is whether you would have considered it rape if he had made the moves she asked him to make.

After all, she was drunk.

If she regretted it in the morning I'd have respected her claims, yes. If it was something they had discussed previously when they were sober and was something he had good reason to believe she actually wanted to do that I think it would be a reasonable defense.

 

[Ryika]

If she regretted it in the morning I'd have respected her claims, yes. If it was something they had discussed previously when they were sober and was something he had good reason to believe she actually wanted to do that I think it would be a reasonable defense.

I see, just as I expected.

What if he had been more drunk than her?

 

[Valka D'Ur]

Lol, how do you know you wouldn't have been happier otherwise? And how do you women who are brought up by and around MRAs aren't "better, happier women"? Not that these anecdotes mean anything. As you know I provided my own anecdote of living with a feminist, and it was an abusive hell.

I was brought up around people who indoctrinated me with "It's a MAN'S world" and men are the bosses, women and girls obey, I was not to express an opinion to my grandfather unless it was in basic agreement with his own, or unless he specifically asked what I thought about something.

Most teenage rebellions involve drugs, alcohol, and parties. Mine involved being introduced to a wider world when I started working in musical theatre and realizing that I didn't have to be so damn deferential and a doormat. I started expressing any opinion I wanted at home - including the intention to keep on with theatre work - and it precipitated the first of many bad arguments with my grandfather... with my grandmother's mouth falling open in disbelief at some of the things I was saying, to stand up for myself. I was informed that I was not entitled to my own opinions until I was an adult, and when (not if) I married, my opinions would be whatever my husband's opinions were.

This happened in 1980, and as I said, it was the first of many arguments. My grandfather died in 1986, and my grandmother thought she had the duty to take up where he left off. I was in college, doing my anthropology/geography degree at the time, still working in theatre, taking the Western Board of Music exams with the aim of becoming a music teacher. She was shocked when I finally told her, "Grandad is dead. You don't have to be him. Just stop."

So no, it's not correct to say that it was "happy." There were times when it was hell, particularly the times when my grandmother dared to take my side of the argument. My grandfather actually threatened to divorce her at one point.

As for your ex, others here have expressed the view that she wasn't abusive because she was a feminist. She was just plain abusive, period.

How does it destroy the accuser's life? How would you feel if you were accused of rape?

I just want to point out that Brock Turner pleaded not guilty, and that this was written by his dad. It's not strange for someone's dad to stick up for them, especially if they believe they are innocent.

Thankfully I have never been in the position where accusing anyone of raping me was relevant. But I do know women who have been in that situation, and the fact is that in so many cases, society at large - and some cops in particular, along with others, like the judge I mentioned umpteen pages ago, tend to blame the victim. If word gets out, particularly if the accused is popular, wealthy, famous, in a position of authority, etc., people generally don't want to believe the victim.

No, it's not strange for someone's dad to stick up for them... but in the Brock Turner case, it amounted to "boys will be boys and it's so unfair to ruin my son's life for '20 minutes of action."

Disgusting, both the father and the son.

It sounds reasonable on the surface, but really it's a male-shaming tactic. For example, imagine if there were campaigns to "teach girls not falsely accuse boys" or "teach girls not to be gold-diggers". That would be a bit hurtful to females, wouldn't it? My objection is with the gendered nature of the campaign. Of course we should teach people that rape is bad, and we do. I've never met a single person that thinks rape is ok.

Agreed that people should be taught that rape is bad. But if you think only women can be gold-diggers or that nobody thinks rape is okay, you've been sheltered.

I remember one time when my ex-girlfriend was drunk. We were getting into it and she kept trying to get me to agree to a threesome with my friend. I told her that made me super uncomfortable and shut down. She proceeded to shame the hell out of me "but I'm hornnyyyyyyyyy", "are you *beep* serious?" "why'd you get me so worked up for nothing?"

I've never even bothered to share that story until now because people would probably just laugh at me.

I'm not sure why someone would stay with someone like that.