Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Rape Culture: Why Yes can mean No

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Darth Ovious View Post
    Oh I should have known that you identify as a feminist but then it's not surprising considering your lack of common sense. Yes, there are measures that can be taken to be prevent rape, but having a hissy fit at men through a poster designed to demonize them is not the answer.
    Problem is, you're dealing with somebody that has no clue what risk management is (and yes, it is a real concept that the AF has drilled into every airman for years and years) and how it is different than 'victim blaming'. Risk management is the idea that behaviors can lead to increases of risk and you should try to take steps to deal with this risk. Since crimes do tend to spike at night vs the daytime. Is it a pretty good idea to be aware of this fact and to change up your behaviors because the dark can be more dangerous vs the daytime? Yeah, sounds like a good idea to me. Now, is it your fault if something happened to you in the dark? Of course not, it is the criminals fault. Victim blaming would be saying you're somehow at fault because some dangerous thug decided to target you, for some reason. As long as PM fails to acknowledge this, he'll keep failing to understand the basics.
    Last edited by lilpixieofterror; 05-23-2015, 08:21 AM.
    "The man from the yacht thought he was the first to find England; I thought I was the first to find Europe. I did try to found a heresy of my own; and when I had put the last touches to it, I discovered that it was orthodoxy."
    GK Chesterton; Orthodoxy

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Darth Ovious View Post
      Oh well, lets have a stupid list teaching people not to murder or steal or do anything else illegal because that will work won't it? No it won't. Rape culture doesn't exist. The number of rapes have been declining for years now but for some reason feminists have their panties in a twist more than ever.

      PM you are a man. This list is specifically targeting you as being a perpetrator of rape. It creates distrust in you as a man because of your gender. If you do not see how buying into this is slandering your own gender then there is nothing I can do to help you. Why do you think the whole rhetoric is teach men not to rape when I have already provided examples of woman raping men as well? It's because you're a man and you're evil and you're not to be trusted. Go and research a video on youtube called my family raped me just to see how insane this nonsense has got.

      The poster does nothing to address rape what so ever. It doesn't talk about the definition of rape, it doesn't constitute what counts as rape. All it does is tell random men who read it not to stupidly go out and commit a crime that THEY KNOW IS ALREADY ILLEGAL!!!!!! It doesn't help anybody in any way whatsoever.

      Oh I should have known that you identify as a feminist but then it's not surprising considering your lack of common sense. Yes, there are measures that can be taken to be prevent rape, but having a hissy fit at men through a poster designed to demonize them is not the answer.

      What is this poster teaching anybody PM? You already know that rape is illegal, it's already a criminal act and people are aware of that. It's not like when people read it they are going to think "Oh, I didn't realize that rape was bad. Gosh I better stop raping women then".

      I guess you are one of them people who need a daily reminder not to rape.

      The list isn't an attempt to teach people not to rape.
      I have no idea how you could come to the conclusion that rape culture doesn't exist.
      You are reading a lot from the list that isn't there. The list does not target me as a perpetrator of rape and it is not an attempt at addressing rape, preventing rape, or defining rape. I already explained to you what the list is about. "Rape culture supports victim blaming so the list turns that around by using rape prevention tips targeted at a would-be criminal."

      Comment


      • Originally posted by lilpixieofterror View Post
        Which is total nonsense because if that was true, our Victorian friends wouldn't have a concept of rape and since they clearly did... correlation does not equal causation. In reality, just like any other crime, there sure is going to be behaviors and groups that end up being more likely to be victims of rape, but that doesn't mean it was deserved either. There's a large difference between victim blaming and recognizing patterns and being aware that your patterns can make you more likely to be the victim of some crimes. Obviously, single women are more likely to be the victims of date rape vs married women. Is there anything wrong with being single? No because we all were single, at one point in time. Is there anything wrong with dating? No. Does anybody (man or women) deserve to be date raped? No, but we need to understand that the actions and behaviors we do, can lead to people taking advantage of us. Things like taking first dates in a public place, being aware of your surroundings, trusting your intuition about somebody, etc are not 'victim blaming' as it is looking at what you do, knowing that even innocent acts can place you at a greater risk, and taking steps to deal with these risk isn't 'victim blaming'. Do you even know the difference between risk management and victim blaming? Your answers seem to indicate 'no'. Besides, you're not debating a person who claims some people 'deserved it'. You're debating people here and attacking strawman doesn't make your arguments sound any better.
        It is nonsense, but many people believe it.

        Those ideas you have about how to mitigate risk may be effective in specific situations, but the ways people can be raped, even within a subcategory like date rape, are so varied that any effective utilization is minute compared to the general irrelevancy they have and these ideas being used to blame the victim for their own rape.

        If they did, they sure would get an ear full. Besides, you're not arguing against them, you're arguing against me and no where have I ever used the concept of 'victim blaming' in any way. I have used the concept of risk management, but that is a far cry from 'victim blaming'. Do you even know the differences between the two?
        You said "criminals were responsible for their crimes and victims often are not and I haven't seen anybody argue any different". People saying a rape victim was asking for it is an example of people arguing any different.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Darth Ovious View Post
          He also argued that those men were wrong because they didn't come to female perspectives.
          I don't see that in there.

          Yes indeed. However what's left for you in terms of feminism? When do you give that mantle up?
          Not sure what you mean by this. Educated people recognize that faith should be about using one's critical faculties to develop trust and loyalty. And educated people should recognize that feminism should be about promoting social, cultural, political and financial equality for women.

          OK, so you are against those things but why would you still consider feminism to be legit then? Do they not have blind faith in some magical patriarchy that doesn't exist?
          I always thought "patriarchy" basically meant "a society in which male supremacy is present." Considering that we live in a society in which women seem to be more frequently criticized and judged for bodily appearance than men, are often viewed negatively if they're promiscuous whereas men who are promiscuous are often viewed positively, and often have their own sex used as insults (i.e. "You play like a girl" when what's meant is "You play poorly," or "You're such a girl" when what's meant is "You're weak and helpless"), I'd say that our society does still have such elements of male supremacy.

          And they were wrong. However notice it was other Christians who told them they were wrong. So what doesn't feminism sort out their own house as well while they are at it. How come the radicals are still the ones controlling the narrative?
          Eh...it took the bloodiest war in American history--one that shamefully pitted countryman against countryman--to end slavery. And it's pretty sad that people once actually debated whether black people deserved equal rights and opportunity. I hardly believe this is some great accomplishment worth boasting about for the church.

          Besides that, I don't agree that "the radicals" are actually controlling the narrative. But if I accepted that premise, would it not be fair to ask why the fundamentalist Christians are still the ones "controlling the narrative" regarding the nature of faith, and all those other misconceptions about Christianity?

          Actually wrong. The identity of feminist is actually at a low amongst women and it's because of feminisms bad image that this is the case. The following link is for Britain but you can find similar studies for America that show most people believe in equality but don't identify as feminist.
          Not my experiences and observations in college in the US (never had a problem finding people who identified as feminist), but okay then--we can revise that to "Pretty much everyone actually IS a feminist; they've just been unfortunately influenced by the lie that feminism means something bad."

          So in others words you think they are idiots instead for not knowing the basis of their own beliefs and how they actually ground those factually?
          No. I think they're falling into a common mistake (being uncritical) that happens to many people, probably including you and me regarding at least one thing at some point in our lives.

          Funny how it's only men who come off looking monstrous from it. Meanwhile female rapists and abusers are totally forgotten about.
          This, I think, seems to be the crux of the issue for you. Why do you perceive this as "making men come off as monstrous?" I literally do not have that perception at all. I hate to sound as if I'm psychoanalyzing you, but honestly, your reaction sounds to me as if you're insecure about your sex for some reason. I think most people are aware that most men are not rapists, and as such it seems more of a condemnation of human evil (and rightly so), not as a slanderous campaign specifically against men.

          What's so hard to understand about it? They belong to a hate movement against men. I don't see what's hard in believing that a hate movement attracts those who hate. Would you think so lightly of a white supremacist movement? Would you try to argue that they weren't all so bad? I don't think so, so I'm not sure what you expect me to concede here. We both know that hate movements are possible so why is this even an argument?
          But feminism is quite obviously not a hate movement. At worst, there might be some individual feminists who for whatever reason hate men, but there is nothing inherently bad with the idea that women should have equality. Meanwhile, white supremacy is entirely centered around the idea that non-white people are inferior to white people. The two are so unrelated that you might as well compare apples to silverback gorillas.

          Well it is responsible for family break down and a lot of other things.
          "Women are of inherently equal worth as men" led to the breakdown of the family?

          Do they themselves consider themselves feminists? Have you asked them what they identify themselves as?
          Yes to both.

          Well for a starter a lot of the second wave radical feminists argued for a goddess rather than a god. Mary Daly argued a lot about this in her books. So argued that a goddess was real but the patriarchy distorted it with their teachings. A lot of the radical feminsts that are the ones who spoke out against marriage. They thought that marriage was akin to slavery for women. They argued that for women to be truly free then they need to destroy marriage in it's totality. As for lesbians well that is what radical feminism is about. It's separating women from men completely.
          And non-radical feminists don't believe that, so...?

          I think it's after our time as such. I am in my 30's now and it was just starting to happen when I was going through school. It got worse after I left I think. I guess the biggest indicator that you need to look for is the high rates that children, epescially boys are put onto drugs for what is normal behaviour for most boys. Boys tend to run about a lot when they are younger but now they are getting diagnosed with rubbish disorders like ADHD, etc and then getting put onto drugs.
          Whoa, hold on. I suspect that some diagnosed cases of ADHD are actually just kids being kids, but jumping from that to "ADHD is a rubbish disorder" (as if it isn't actually real at all) is quite a stretch.

          Boys are also getting pulled up for other kinds of normal behaviour like kidding on they are shooting a gun at bad guys, etc. It's normal for boys to do this but they are treated like they are potential future school shooters. Essentially, there is this idea that boys are bad and they need to behave more like girls who are considered good instead of just accepting the differences.
          But what does feminism have to do with this? People are acting that way because of infamous school shooting incidents--they understandably would rather be safe than sorry. I don't see any evidence that it's because of some perception that boys are bad. I'm not sure that one's sex even has any relevance to it. If anything, it seems to just be "Let's take every conceivable measure to make sure that type of tragedy never occurs again," and boys happen to be the sex that's more likely to joke about shooting guns.

          Here is a question. If it's a womans choice that whether she keeps a baby or not and the man doesn't have a say then why is the man financially responsible for something that is not his choice? Shouldn't the man be able to walk away if he wants?
          Not sure what the issue is here. The man had a necessary role in the creation of the baby. Why should he be allowed to just walk away?

          Interesting, the artist is from Japan from what I can see.
          I don't see how her homeland is relevant, and besides, the readership largely consists of people from the West.

          I didn't even say she was a feminist in the first place. However, you also forgot the other women on the panel and the AUDIENCE all laughing along.
          There was also at least one panelist who spoke against it, and it didn't sound like the entire audience was laughing, and the part that did sounded more like an awkward, somewhat uncomfortable laugh.

          However it's a valid point that this sort of thing would NEVER be accepted if it was reversed. If it was 5 guys and a male audience it wouldn't even get to TV in the first place. It just wouldn't happen at all. However this was perfectly fine for some strange reason to put on air for view of millions of viewers. None of them lost their job either. Even though they got complaints and apologised, the apology was pathetic as well as they sniggered through it.
          I thought the show was filmed live, rather than subjected to a heavy editing process. I could in fact see a male panel managing to get similar material on air in those circumstances. Anyhow, at most this tells me that Sharon Osbourne and some of the people who are silly enough to pay money to sit in a studio and watch her talk have unnervingly crude senses of humor.
          Last edited by fm93; 05-25-2015, 10:29 PM.
          Learn to do right; seek justice. Defend the oppressed. Take up the cause of the fatherless; plead the case of the widow.--Isaiah 1:17

          I don't think that all forms o[f] slavery are inherently immoral.--seer

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Zymologist View Post
            So basically we have to treat the genders differently in order to ensure that they're treated the same?
            In general principle (obviously things are trickier when applied to specific situations), this is actually fairly straightforward. If you're a doctor (whose job is to make sure people are healthy) and one patient of yours just has a slight cold and another patient is sweating profusely and vomiting blood, you have to treat those two patients differently in order to make sure they end up in the same state of good health.
            Learn to do right; seek justice. Defend the oppressed. Take up the cause of the fatherless; plead the case of the widow.--Isaiah 1:17

            I don't think that all forms o[f] slavery are inherently immoral.--seer

            Comment


            • Also, this rape discussion that's been carrying on for several pages seems like much ado about almost nothing. There are plenty of things in hindsight that women theoretically could've done that might've led to the rape not occurring. No one disagrees with this. But there is nothing that women should've done to avoid getting raped, in the sense of having a moral obligation. No matter how scantily clad or intoxicated one may be, or whether one interacts with shady characters, no one "deserves" to be raped or "was asking for it." Hopefully, no one disagrees with this either. There are measures that have the potential effect of lessening the chances of your child being abducted, but if you don't take them and subsequently your child is abducted, no one should say "Well, you DESERVED to lose your child" or "You were just ASKING to have your child be abducted."

              That's the issue as expressed in the list. We recognize how absurd it would be to morally condemn a parent for the abduction of his/her child, but therein lies an inconsistent standard. Apparently an unfortunately large number of people over the years have responded to rape victims in ways that seem to incur moral guilt on them for being raped, as if they committed some heinous crime by wearing revealing clothing and the rape was a justified punishment.

              The list, then, uses parody to highlight that absurdity, and to point out that instead of focusing on teaching women to stay safe in a dangerous world, society should address the root cause and try create a safe world without such dangers. It echoes a certain prophecy in Revelation--instead of forever teaching humans to avoid or cope with suffering and pain on Earth, God will eventually bring about a new heavens and new Earth, one "with no more death or mourning or crying or pain."
              Learn to do right; seek justice. Defend the oppressed. Take up the cause of the fatherless; plead the case of the widow.--Isaiah 1:17

              I don't think that all forms o[f] slavery are inherently immoral.--seer

              Comment


              • Originally posted by fm93 View Post
                But there is nothing that women should've done to avoid getting raped, in the sense of having a moral obligation. No matter how scantily clad or intoxicated one may be, or whether one interacts with shady characters, no one "deserves" to be raped or "was asking for it." Hopefully, no one disagrees with this either. There are measures that have the potential effect of lessening the chances of your child being abducted, but if you don't take them and subsequently your child is abducted, no one should say "Well, you DESERVED to lose your child" or "You were just ASKING to have your child be abducted."
                There is the responsibility to take measures to keep yourself safe, just as the parents have responsibilities to their child. While "asking for X" is highly emotionally provocative, move past the feels, please: if you're abandoning responsibility by getting intoxicated (for example) then you are knowingly placing yourself in danger, you are "asking for it": inviting and provoking trouble .

                That's the issue as expressed in the list. We recognize how absurd it would be to morally condemn a parent for the abduction of his/her child
                Strawman. We don't place the responsibility of the act of abduction on them, we condemn them creating the situation of vulnerability by not taking the appropriate safeguards (if applicable to the situation). If you leave your house unlocked you are similarly inviting and provoking the trouble that would likely ensue, and your bear the responsibility for doing so.

                Now while indeed some people do place all the responsibility (of the criminal act and of creating the vulnerable situation) on the victim, that is hardly the position of the majority, let alone the posters in this thread. Instead, you and other feminists rail against these extreme views to deflect from the very pertinent point that many women are behaving irresponsibly and knowingly placing themselves in dangerous situations, then covering for their stupidity and irresponsibility when they weep and play the victim card afterwards.

                The list, then, uses parody to highlight that absurdity, and to point out that instead of focusing on teaching women to stay safe in a dangerous world, society should address the root cause and try create a safe world without such dangers. It echoes a certain prophecy in Revelation--instead of forever teaching humans to avoid or cope with suffering and pain on Earth, God will eventually bring about a new heavens and new Earth, one "with no more death or mourning or crying or pain."
                Only God can bring about such a world. But for now there are many dangers and many predators, and therefore women need to take all reasonable steps to keep themselves safe (especially in increasingly dangerous societies).

                To fool yourself - to think that one can devolve all responsibility for one's safety to 'society' - ie. men - is one great folly of contemporary feminism: it wants the freedom of being an 'adult' while trying to disown any and all responsibilities when irksome, trying to put the burden and blame on men, which is (as I have repeatedly noted) a call for patriarchy.
                Last edited by Paprika; 05-26-2015, 03:32 AM.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Paprika View Post
                  There is the responsibility to take measures to keep yourself safe, just as the parents have responsibilities to their child. While "asking for X" is highly emotionally provocative, move past the feels, please: if you're abandoning responsibility by getting intoxicated (for example) then you are knowingly placing yourself in danger, you are "asking for it": inviting and provoking trouble .


                  Strawman. We don't place the responsibility of the act of abduction on them, we condemn them creating the situation of vulnerability by not taking the appropriate safeguards (if applicable to the situation). If you leave your house unlocked you are similarly inviting and provoking the trouble that would likely ensue, and your bear the responsibility for doing so.

                  Now while indeed some people do place all the responsibility (of the criminal act and of creating the vulnerable situation) on the victim, that is hardly the position of the majority, let alone the posters in this thread. Instead, you and other feminists rail against these extreme views to deflect from the very pertinent point that many women are behaving irresponsibly and knowingly placing themselves in dangerous situations, then covering for their stupidity and irresponsibility when they weep and play the victim card afterwards.


                  Only God can bring about such a world. But for now there are many dangers and many predators, and therefore women need to take all reasonable steps to keep themselves safe (especially in increasingly dangerous societies).

                  To fool yourself - to think that one can devolve all responsibility for one's safety to 'society' - ie. men - is one great folly of contemporary feminism: it wants the freedom of being an 'adult' while trying to disown any and all responsibilities when irksome, trying to put the burden and blame on men, which is (as I have repeatedly noted) a call for patriarchy.
                  There are a couple things here I can't endorse but he's right about responsibility.

                  It's really, really idiotic to take the avocation of safety measures as trying to blame the victim. The mere fact that not all rapes can be prevented is a really moronic argument for not trying to prevent any at all.
                  "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot

                  "Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman

                  My Personal Blog

                  My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)

                  Quill Sword

                  Comment


                  • It's as absurd as claiming that there's no need to teach one's children to be cautious when interacting with strangers because most assaults on children come from family members or others familiar to them.

                    But let's go one level deeper. It's absurd, of course. But why are feminists promoting this sort of absurdity?

                    Comment


                    • Wow, I accidentally left out one little word and it significantly changed the meaning of my post.

                      The list, then, uses parody to highlight that absurdity, and to point out that instead of ONLY focusing on teaching women to stay safe in a dangerous world, society should address the root cause and try create a safe world without such dangers. It echoes a certain prophecy in Revelation--instead of forever teaching humans to avoid or cope with suffering and pain on Earth, God will eventually bring about a new heavens and new Earth, one "with no more death or mourning or crying or pain."
                      Fixed. Obviously I wasn't saying that society shouldn't teach safety measures at all.
                      Learn to do right; seek justice. Defend the oppressed. Take up the cause of the fatherless; plead the case of the widow.--Isaiah 1:17

                      I don't think that all forms o[f] slavery are inherently immoral.--seer

                      Comment

                      Related Threads

                      Collapse

                      Topics Statistics Last Post
                      Started by little_monkey, Yesterday, 04:19 PM
                      6 responses
                      45 views
                      0 likes
                      Last Post whag
                      by whag
                       
                      Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                      42 responses
                      230 views
                      0 likes
                      Last Post whag
                      by whag
                       
                      Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                      24 responses
                      104 views
                      0 likes
                      Last Post Ronson
                      by Ronson
                       
                      Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                      32 responses
                      176 views
                      0 likes
                      Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                      Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                      73 responses
                      286 views
                      0 likes
                      Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                      Working...
                      X