Just Smith.

razingcomplacency:

just-smith:

razingcomplacency:

just-smith:

razingcomplacency:

just-smith:

lookoutsideyourself:

cuntofdoom:

Philadelphia Magazine: “The New Rules of College Sex” [TW sexual assault, victim blaming]

shortbreadsh:

Last night I innocently glanced through this magazine and was confronted with possibly the most disgusting and alarmist, “But what about the men?!” article about rape I’ve ever read. Things like this make me unable to think rationally so here are a few thoughts:

• Few things disgust me like the bizarre fantasy of this world in which false rape allegations are common. How many men do you know who have been falsely accused of rape? Because I know zero, and I know MANY women who have been raped. And by the way, as far as I know, none of those women ever pressed charges.
• To the woman who said: “If I were sending off a son to college right now, I’d be very concerned.” If you think you raised the type of man to have sex in shady as hell circumstances and/or with incapacitated women, you should be concerned. Also, I hope for her hypothetical sake that you do not have a daughter, so that you are not more afraid about a son’s trip to the dean’s office than a daughter’s you know… actual rape.
• “Those Clery Act reports contradict Joe Biden’s claim of an epidemic. Take Temple University. There are 30,000 students at its main campus on North Broad Street. The student body is 55 percent female, so if the one-in-five DOJ figure for sexual assaults is correct, 3,180 of the current female students would have been sexually assaulted while at the school. And yet Temple’s Clery Act report shows five sexual assaults in 2007, two in 2008, and two in 2009.” Wow, I guess I can’t argue with this. No woman in history has ever chosen not to report a rape and subject herself to the character assassination that goes along with it! Wait, what about all the friends I just mentioned?! I guess my experience is an anomaly!
• “Deborah Nolan says that in 25 years at Ursinus, she’s heard a ton of sexual assault stories, and only one didn’t involve alcohol. Drinking lowers inhibitions: “Sometimes we want to be coaxed into things. But it makes people irate when you say that.” I…..

Just read it yourself. Every single bit is horrible. The editor of Philadelphia magazine can be reached here.

Rape apologists need to STFU and go away now, thanks.

I feel ill whenever anybody says “But what about the men?!” in a mocking tone, as if it is ridiculous to care about men, an entire gender. That’s misandry right there. Feminism is centred around some people calling out injustices and saying “what about the women”, so rather than laughing at men sticking up for themselves, you would do better to show some respect.

For false rape accusations, see here and here and here. They exist, and treating them like the problem that they are is not misogyny. It is not oppression. It is not rape apologism. It is fair and equal justice. So you’re acting as if the fact that you’ve never seen one means that they don’t exist, then calling everybody else ‘bizarre’ and ‘disgusting’ for having seen one? Yeah, that’s not cool. Do some research beyond your own experience, maybe.

Mostly I’m offended by the continuation of your misandry, supporting the ‘men are potential rapists’ idea this article opposes whilst treating all women as potential rape victims, with no overlap. Those stereotypes and prejudices are dangerous, and they aren’t true. See more here and here.

I’ll also add to the point about the alcohol. It is not a man’s responsibility to give women a breathalyser test. If they seem sober and act willingly, you would be extremely harsh to convict him of rape. See here and here. This position is anti-man, and I doubt that you’d give the same judgement if their positions were reversed: if Jack was drunk, went over to Diane and grabbed her crotch whilst pushing against her, then started kissing and embracing her, and things went further, would you call him a rape victim? In all seriousness? If people said ‘well he was willing’, would you attack them for being rape-apologists? If people said ‘well it was his fault for getting drunk if he knows that’s how he’ll behave’, would you attack them for being victim-blamers? Would there be such an outrage? 

I don’t think so, because your misandry is on plain display in this post. Feel free to prove me wrong. Otherwise, please read up on the facts in these links, and then see where that takes you. This has been a calling-out. Thank you for your time.

“I feel ill whenever anybody says “But what about the men?!” in a mocking tone, as if it is ridiculous to care about men, an entire gender. That’s misandry right there. Feminism is centred around some people calling out injustices and saying “what about the women”, so rather than laughing at men sticking up for themselves, you would do better to show some respect

You would do better to educate yourself. ‘But what about the men’ is usually used as a derailing tactic in conversations that were centrally about the rape of women. No, men do not get to butt in the front of the line and say ‘but what about men’ as if men are the only valuable ones. Not to mention, the other side of ‘what about the men’ is that rape victims are often totally forgotten sometime so we can talk about the ‘bright futures’ of male rapists and how their ‘lives will be ruined’ if they’re put in jail for, y’know, committing a crime. No, its not misandry to be fucking sick to death of the conversation constantly being deflected from women.

Yes, it is usually used as a derailing tactic. By feminists. Whenever men start a discussion of men’s rights, you can be sure that a feminist can come in and mock it with ‘but what about the menz?!’. This is an article written by a man about how men suffer under double standards, and the OP describes it as ‘the most “But what about the men?!” article I’ve ever read.’ That, my friend, is derailing.

Usually when men interrupt a feminist discussion about women’s rights, they do it for a reason. For starters, they never say ‘what about the menz?!’. Typically some feminists will be discussing an instance of a woman suffering, and suggesting that this is because men oppress and hate women. A man then has the right to stick up for himself and point out that this instance causes suffering for men too. It’s not about men butting in at the front of the queue. It’s about men speaking up and actually having their voice heard for once in a ‘gender equality’ movement that pays shockingly little attention to their suffering, and pointing out what nobody seems to understand; that they are no more oppressors than women, and just as much victims. They will usually get laughed and and silenced and derailed for that, again with ‘but what about the menz?!’. 

It’s not men acting as if they are the only valuable ones, it’s men pointing out that women aren’t the only valuable ones, because that’s how many feminists treat them. Misandry is just as much a problem as misogyny is, but you’ll rarely see a feminist supporting men where it doesn’t help women. Instead feminists give us campaigns to stop violence against women when violence against men is much more common and less cared about. We already know that women are victims, but that is all that many feminists repeat. Women are victims, men aren’t. Women’s suffering is the only suffering worth caring about. A man standing up against that to point out that the statistics disagree is not automatically claiming that men are the only valuable ones. Please.

Some misogynists might do that, but the vast majority of men on social justice blogs are campaigners against sexism - in particular that breed of sexism that feminists seem to forget about dealing with, that which directly hurts men. ‘What about the menz?!’ is mostly therefore used, along with exaggerated privilege and ‘mansplaining’, to silence and derail these men. Even if some men did deserve to be silenced, feminists could have mocked them by saying ‘but what about the rapistz?!’ or dealing with them individually. But that’s not the message. The message we get is that feminists think that male suffering is something unimportant, and worthy of ridicule - and unfortunately many of them do. They may not be ‘man-haters’, but they think that men holding more material power makes them completely undeserving of any justice or sympathy, which is barbaric. That’s the feminism that ‘what about the menz?!’ represents. That’s what it means.

False rape accusations do exist. About as much as a false accusation for every other crime (Link, Link). Yet so much victim blaming and slut shaming focused largely on women when it comes to rape. Yes, largely framing women as manipulative schemers out to imprison men by implying false rape accusations should be the main issue is definitely misogyny, because that’s the way those false rape accusations are brought up most of the time.

Yes. But largely framing men as rapists is just as much misandry. The statistics show that they are roughly equal - so if we are going to say that all men are potential rapists, it is no different to suggest that all women are potential liars. Except the male stereotype is worse, because it is the more serious accusation. So no, dealing with false accusations harshly - as we would with any other serious crime - is not misogyny.

Men /are/ potential rapists.

Sorry?

They are the majority of rapists in our society. They are encouraged to look at women as sex objects, and public property if they act ‘sluttily’ enough or just, y’know, exist in the presence of men. Rape culture is largely based on the idea that women are just going to have ‘get used to’ being afraid of ‘tempting men’ to lose control of themselves.

You know what. In Racistville, black people are the majority of muggers. That’s why it’s okay to treat all black people like potential muggers, and be wary of them. That’s why it’s okay to have double standards in prosecuting them, whilst the more refined white people are given the benefit of the doubt. That’s why we can police what black people do, and tell them they aren’t allowed to go near a white person if it makes that white person uncomfortable, because they are Schrödinger’s Mugger. That’s why we can have campaigns saying ‘teach black people not to mug’ as if black people are somehow morally inferior, rather than the difference being a result of a society which stereotypes them. That’s why we can take them aside and give them patronising lessons on how it is rude to assault someone, and repeatedly teach them what the idea of property means. That’s why when a white person loses something and saying a black person probably stole it, we assume the white person to be right. The majority of muggers are black people, so all black people should be treated as a legally inferior part of society, as potential muggers. Black people live in a ‘mug culture’ which is their fault, not our fault for forcing the oppressive stereotypes on them. We’re the oppressed ones here, not them, because they’re the ones who mug us. They can’t be victims.

“ I’ll also add to the point about the alcohol. It is not a man’s responsibility to give women a breathalyser test. If they seem sober and act willingly, you would be extremely harsh to convict him of rape.”

Maybe it should be his responsibility? Everyone’s responsibility someone is in a right mind to consent? If you don’t want to rape anyone, you should make sure that person is capable of enthusiastic consent. 

Drunk people are capable of seemingly consenting, and with some enthusiasm. Besides, how drunk is drunk? Different amounts have different effects on different people, so there is no accurate way to measure. Where is the line which stops consent? Alcohol is a difficult matter for these and a thousand other reasons, as outlined in the links I provided. But if you wont read those, I suppose I’ll have to buy a breathalyser and carry it everywhere I go, because every woman I meet is potentially drunk. Women don’t have to carry them, because they are always victims and could never be a potential rapist. Everything is the man’s responsibility, and he is always the scapegoat. No double standards here…

“If Jack was drunk, went over to Diane and grabbed her crotch whilst pushing against her, then started kissing and embracing her, and things went further, would you call him a rape victim? In all seriousness? If people said ‘well he was willing’, would you attack them for being rape-apologists? If people said ‘well it was his fault for getting drunk if he knows that’s how he’ll behave’, would you attack them for being victim-blamers? Would there be such an outrage?”

Again the zero-sum game mindset (‘why aren’t you talking about men more’).

What? I didn’t say ‘why aren’t you talking about men more’, I said that they were misandric in their attitudes to rape and gender, and that they probably wouldn’t care if a drunk man woke up next to a woman having slept with her and not remembered. In fact, if he left without saying goodbye, they would probably call him a misogynist womaniser. For not saying goodbye to his rapist. But you know, we’re all guilty of it. It isn’t a crime when it happens to men, and it isn’t a crime unless a man does it. One of the oldest stereotypes in the book. We react on that basis, and our juries convict on that basis.

If by things went further, you mean Diane raped him, then yes it would still be rape. Does Jack think he was raped afterward? Does he think he wasn’t in the right behind to consent? Then yeah, rape. Yes it would still be rape apologism, yes it would still be victim blaming. But sorry to say, in reality, most of this happens to women and most the rape apologism and victim blaming rains down on them. Not men. Not all, but most. I see nothing wrong with focusing on women with a problem that overwhelmingly affects them more.

Women are only affected more because men are more likely to be heterosexual. What we have to ask is: why do men rape more? If you say it is because that is how men are, that men are naturally more rape-y, you are sexist. If you say that it is because society treats men like potential rapists, raises them in a materialistic and commercialised culture which glorifies sex at any price and the treating of others like objects, and then teaches them that it is normal for men to be violent (whereas women are told they are victims) and oppressive, before they face unrealistic expectations of masculinity (egged on by women who want men to be dominant and persistent and to not always take no for an answer) and are told to man up… men only rape so much because of sexism in the first place. Sexism against men. So if you think that derailing posts which try to fight stereotypes which harm men, mocking ‘what about the men’ as irrelevant, and treating male suffering as unimportant whilst focusing disproportionately on women (even in areas where men are more likely to be victims - domestic violence ring a bell?) is going to help that, you need to have a serious sit down and think. Men don’t oppress woman, society oppresses us both. If part of that oppression, and natural selection and pressures from women, tell men to oppress women, we shouldn’t instinctively turn on them - we still need to fight the same oppression, the same cause. We still need to acknowledge men as victims and help them; and then, free of stereotypes to conform to, the other oppression goes away. Just battering away at men gets us nowhere, and the negativity might even be making the problem worse.

Oh, and that’s on a topic where men are less likely to be the victims. But this post was about false rape accusations, which are an independent crime as no rape has occurred - so it is a fallacy to compare the suffering of the two. This crime primarily targets men, it is primarily perpetrated by women, and it is caused by a culture which teaches these women that all men are potential rapists, and that they can get away with treating them that way. 

Derailing a discussion on how that culture oppresses men, because their suffering is irrelevant, and because you are ‘fucking sick to death of the conversation constantly being deflected from women’, that’s not cool. Men matter too, and we can’t solve either rape or inequality without them.

“Yes, it is usually used as a derailing tactic. By feminists. Whenever men start a discussion of men’s rights, you can be sure that a feminist can come in and mock it with ‘but what about the menz?!’.”

Except not, and those men seem to, oddly enough, start that conversation in the middle of the already on-going conversation which was centered around women. Women didn’t just start saying that for no reason, they did it because men kept barging in and expecting the conversation to revolve around them. There is no good reason for derailing. And clearly, they never say what about teh menz but /that’s what it always comes down to/, that the conversation isn’t centering around men enough, even though the original subject wasn’t about them in the first place.

As has always been said before, men have their voices valued, elevated, and treated as better than women’s voices in the entirety of the world, the whole point of gender equality is that women are still treated as inferior and so lifting /their/ voices up as priority is important. As usual though, you are in denial of your male privilege and the fact that men /are/ oppressors. Just because you’re harmed by oppression as well doesn’t mean you haven’t taken part in it. It’s just a straight up lie to say that men aren’t largely behind victimizing women, that it’s gendered violence which is entirely different from the violence you speak of. You again misrepresent feminism, men are victims, but they are not victims of sexism or because of their gender. Get it through your head. Women’s suffering is the suffering constantly brushed aside as special interests and erased, because what about the men? By, y’know, men. Just the idea that ‘misandry’ is just as much of a problem as misogyny is ridiculous, sorry bro I don’t think you have an entire society telling you you’re inferior and dehumanizing you every single day of your life.:\ Men’s voices are largely the ones that stifle women’s voices, sorry you’re getting called out on it? Oh well?

You get offended because feminists refuse to let you pretend your male privilege doesn’t exist, you can’t do /anything/ to fight for social justice while you remain in denial. Male suffering is something unimportant or something not to be seen as more valuable at the expense of women? There’s a difference, it’s amazing you don’t see it.

Men are the majority of rapists. It’s not misandry to state a fact. It’s not misandry to point out that our society raises men to see women as sex objects and to feel entitled to them as such. It’s not misandry to point that society makes excuses for men and frames them as having uncontrollable sexual desires that women better be careful not to ‘tempt’ or else they’re sluts for tricking the poor men into raping them. Again, men have an entire culture, rape culture, backing them up for their victimizing and destruction of women, a slew of excuses and justifications that basically make the crimes they commit accepted and expected. Worse? Hardly. Because rape isn’t treated as a serious crime, it’s treated as something that men do to women. Dealing with the ‘false accusations’ dishonestly is misogyny.

I see lower down you’re starting to compare this to ‘racial profiling’ so I’m gonna stop here. Yes, yes, poor oppressed you with all of society backing you up on the idea that women are public property fuck toys there to get you off (yeah, society backs up black people /all the time/ and totally gives them a free ride on ‘mugging’. STFU, damn). How horrible of feminists to criticize this and men for their entitlement and privilege. Why do all MRAs, usually white cis guys, pretend as if men are oppressed the same as people of colour? It just makes you look like a tool.

So you’re gonna buy a breathalyzer huh? Cool, that’s really good of you. See? Now was that minor inconvenience really so difficult to get through? We should all make sure our partners are able to affirmatively consent with a clear mind. Though your delusional tirade is really unnecessary, /I/ never said men aren’t victims. You just did, but not me. /I/ never said women can never be rapists, simply that men are the higher majority of them and that society reinforces this and decides they shouldn’t be responsible for it. You’re so desperate to frame me as the imaginary evil.

So you accused them of not caring because they were focusing on women? It’s man-hating to not focus on men but somehow not woman-hating to want the focus to be taken off women. Kay. Your logic is not our earth logic. And here you go off on this rant about this imaginary scenario. Oi. Except male rapists, juries don’t convict those, they just blame that slut who couldn’t keep her legs closed.

“men are more likely to be heterosexual”

Source.

Egged on by women? Yeah, totally not egged on by men. Or the media controlled by men. Or… yeah. It’s called a patriarchy for a reason. Men are the ones making those rules for you, women are just following the script. You’re right though, men’s fear of being too feminine, inferior like a woman (sexism against women actually) is a factor in the hyper-aggressive and objectifying male culture. Again, please give an actual source on domestic violence ‘hurting men more’. I really doubt it, wife/girlfriend beaters are still celebrated and excused in our society. In the end, men oppress women and are they themselves harmed by their patriarchal structure. It hurts everyone, women just tend to actually feel the brunt of it given their gender. And again I’ll say, you can never be part of the solution, just-smith, if you can’t acknowledge that you’re still largely a part of the problem and that your fellow men, especially the ones who engage in rampant misogyny, should be the ones you criticize if you truly want change.

I already gave my statistics on false rape accusations. And yeah, our culture treats women who accuse men of rape /so well/. Not character assassination or anything goes on! Hahahah. You really have your head in the sand, huh? I’ll cry you a river when you actually recognize the truth. The discussion wasn’t about men in the first place, as I already pointed out your attempt to derail it (deflected /from/ women, as in the original subject was /about/ women and /not/ men, so don’t /derail/ it into something about how men have it worse).

Yeah, men matter too. Just not at the expense of women while you pretend men’s oppression of them doesn’t exist. Good Bye.

I went reductio ad absurdum on your ass, and you agreed with the absurdum. That is.. something special, right there. You think that all men are potential rapists, have the responsibility to breathalyse all sexual partners as a result, and never ever suffer in a society that elevates and loves them.  You said that men are the cause of all sexism and never the victims, that society loves us and doesn’t suppress or restrict us in anyway. You assume that men aren’t oppressed, and then use that assumption to derail my evidence of male oppression. The wheels on your logic go round and round. The one other thing I said which you found ridiculous was that men are mostly heterosexual, and you attacked that common-sense claim rather than actually address my points. You then completely rewrite what I am saying. I say women and men are both privileged, you hear ‘men aren’t privileged’. I say women and men are both oppressed, you hear ‘women’s oppression doesn’t exist’. Yet I’m the one misrepresenting you? You avoid what I’m actually saying, use the typical cop-outs of accusing me of sexist opinions I don’t actually have, and then say goodbye; to flee with the rest of your dignity.

Yeah, I’m done here.

“I went reductio ad absurdum on your ass, and you agreed with the absurdum. That is.. something special, right there. You think that all men are potential rapists, have the responsibility to breathalyse all sexual partners as a result, and never ever suffer in a society that elevates and loves them. “

-sigh- I do think that all men are potential rapists, as long as our culture encourages them to be and makes excuses for them to be and spits on women for criticizing it :\ Oh and as long as keep scoffing at needing to to fix our definitions of consent because they’re so fucked up right now and people still think going home with some dude = consent. So yes, I completely stand with women who think of men as Schrodinger’s Rapist. Also on the breathalyzer, it could be a possible idea, but I applied it to everyone. As I said in my last post, /everyone/ should make sure their potential sexual partners have a clear mind to consent. And I did say men suffer in this society, quite a few times, but as a result of a patriarchal structure which restricts them while oppressing women (the sexism against women creates negative consequences against men). It’s really all up there XD 

Men are the primary cause of sexism, yes. Since sexism is something that men, the privileged group, discriminate against women as a group with. Men can be victims, just not of sexism. Actually I did mention society restricts men, but also does love them above women in most cases yeah. It centers them as the universal default, the superior, and women as the inferior, to the base form that a man even being compared to a woman in the most basic sense is seen as an insult to who he is. I assume that men aren’t oppressed or not oppressed by sexism? Different things.

Common sense? Uh, how is it common sense? Did you do research on the number of homosexual men and heterosexual men? Along with the number of closeted men? Sorry dude, the whole ‘common sense’ thing just sounds like you have no actual reasoning to back you up. Women are not privileged based on their gender, they are marginalized group and oppressed, but men definitely are privileged based on their gender. There is no such thing as Female Privilege, there is plenty of Male Privilege.

Yeah, you misrepresent feminism and their arguments all the time. Again, it’s all up there. And yes you misrepresented me all throughout this little talk, and I have corrected you even in this response. You should pay attention. In the end, one says good-bye to stop a meaningless conversation from going on too long. Unfortunately I have become a hypocrite for chastizing your other friend for coming back into a conversation, because I have now done the same. Oh well, it’s hard to resist pointing out your complete lack of ground to stand on. Nothing wrong with my dignity, looks pretty intact to me chief. As with your friend, the ninja guy, you are too trapped in your utter denial to actually see the world around you. Honestly, do you see this conversation going anywhere?

I’m sure we’ll be talking again later, the next time you say something ignorant or perhaps start talking of how totally non-horrific forced abortion would be. Until then!

If you’re going to reply, why don’t you explain to the class how men are the cause of all sexism. No seriously, go on. Why don’t you demonstrate why reverse sexism doesn’t exist. Why don’t you blame men for gender roles that are so obviously natural, that we have had before we had meaningful societies, that helped us function effectively as group unites, that so many other animals have. Why don’t you suggest that male privilege in some areas is some sort of trump card that means that men can’t be victims of double standards in other areas, against the evidence, whilst maintaining that female privilege doesn’t exist, and accusing other people who actually acknowledge their privilege of being privilege-deniers. Why don’t you use evidence like stereotypes (also here), or societal behaviours such as chivalry (also here and here), or language traits like androcentrism (also here and here), to demonstrate your point that sexism targets women, whilst ignoring the fact that these concepts weren’t created by men, and actually sexistly disadvantage men too. When you’ve done that, you can prove to us that rape and domestic violence and sexual harassment are purely male things, and that all men should be treated as potential rapists. Say that impossible beauty standards (also here) show that men are oppressors, and that only women are objectified, and only women have their sex lives policed. Try to tell me that life is a safe space for men, who are more likely to be the victims of violence, and that men are even immune from sexism because they hold all of the power, and internal misandry doesn’t exist. Laugh at the idea of systematic ‘sexual profiling’, and related misandry in the justice system. Then laugh equally when men are the victims of violence, because stereotypes say that only women can be victims, but then say it is because society loves men; and so it is impossible that nobody cares about their suffering. Don’t care yourself, and then claim that men have always had it better than women, in terms of both legal and social judgements. Point out that masculism is pointless, because any suffering men go through is still a woman’s issue, and so men should ask for help from feminism, a woman’s movement that they need to save them from their own oppression. Say that ‘mansplaining’ and ‘what about the menz’ aren’t in any way derailing, and use them yourself to refer to this post. Explain that when it comes to gender inequalities, women know best. Use circular logic to demonstrate that examples of misandry are invalid because men aren’t oppressed, but then argue that men aren’t oppressed because there are no valid examples of misandry.

Read all of the above links, and then actually outline your reason for once, rather than just derailing mine. That way I won’t have to guess at your opinions and ‘misrepresent’ you. We can see if you actually have any evidence of oppression that was consciously created by men, not nature or society. We can see if you actually have any evidence of how this natural oppression only targets women and not men. We can see if you will join me in admitting your privileges and realising that it stops you seeing oppression that doesn’t concern you, and we’ll see whether that’s oppression that you are charitable enough to care about. We’ll see if you can break out of your utter denial, and actually see the world around you.

As for your intense doubt on homosexuals being a minority, I can tell you that from my experience of identifying as gay I certainly wasn’t made to feel like a majority. But if you want to discount my experience - I am male, after all, so what do I know about inequality? - then a quick internet search will tell you that surveys have consistently placed LGBT people as around 6% of the population of this country. That’s including “don’t know”s. So even allowing for confusion or closets or whatever, are you really going to claim that they’re a majority? Look around you. As I said: common sense. Learn about it.

I don’t expect you to reply with what I’ve requested, and I don’t particularly believe that you are capable of delivering even if you wanted to, but if you try then you might just discover something. Or - of course - you could just throw a few buzzwords at me and reiterate your assumptions. That could be fun too.

It’s up to you.