Twitter Soapbox - Racism, Sexism etc

[gingerhobbit]

Imagine that there's a bowl of M&Ms. 1 in 5 of those M&Ms contain a lethal dose of cyanide. You're going to be slightly cautious around each of those M&Ms until you're sure that it's safe. To act otherwise would be dangerous. So yeah, maybe it's hurtful to your feelings but until you're sure that a stranger isn't going to put you in danger you should probably be careful around them.

Best...analogy...ever.

 

[kylexy]

Here are some facts for you about "rape culture", from professor, author and feminist Christina Hoff Sommers. Enjoy:

 

[MFCGod]

Who thinks you're a monster or a rapist? There's a step in this thought process that I am missing.

In that second tweet, she pretty much says she is scared of every random man she see's out and about - I am a random man you will see out and about

It's upsetting to me that someone might see me walking down the street, fear me and label me as a rapist

It doesn't just upset my ego, it's upsetting they have to carry that fear with them

When I say "not all men" I'm specifically talking about me

I want to reassure them and say I'm sorry they feel like that, please know there are good men in the world too

^ Saying you can't say "not all men" takes that away from me

I'm not trying to end the discussion by saying "not all men" either, it's just a way to continue the discussion without feeling like you're talking to me thinking I am the evil you're scared of

But I'm just repeating myself over and over now, maybe I'm just not expressing myself very eloquently.

 

[gingerhobbit]

@kylexy, you'll also find examples of black people from the 60s and 70s who swore that racism wasn't that bad. Hell, you can still see them on Fox News. You can always find members of a particular group who will deny anything bad is being done to their own people, despite the reality. That doesn't mean they aren't full of shit.

 

[gingerhobbit]

In that second tweet, she pretty much says she is scared of every random man she see's out and about - I am a random man you will see out and about

It's upsetting to me that someone might see me walking down the street, fear me and label me as a rapist

It doesn't just upset my ego, it's upsetting they have to carry that fear with them

When I say "not all men" I'm specifically talking about me

I want to reassure them and say I'm sorry they feel like that, please know there are good men in the world too

^ Saying you can't say "not all men" takes that away from me

I'm not trying to end the discussion by saying "not all men" either, it's just a way to continue the discussion without feeling like you're talking to me thinking I am the evil you're scared of

But I'm just repeating myself over and over now, maybe I'm just not expressing myself very eloquently.

Nope, you aren't explaining yourself poorly. You just are missing one key element: When a woman/women are trying to explain their experiences with men and the overall culture, that is just the wrong damned time to say "not all men." The only correct thing to do is keep your mouth shut and your ears open at that point. They know not all men. They aren't talking about the men who aren't. They're talking about the men who are.

ETA: My first instinct is to do the same thing, to protest "but not meeeee." Sometimes our instincts and first reactions aren't the right ones.

ETA II: I get what you mean about it hurting your ego and making you feel bad. Happens to me, too. But none of this is about our feelings, it's about how they are feeling. The first 2,000 years of human civilization have been about our feelings. It's their turn.

ETA III: Sorry, last thing. The point is, the discussion about rape culture is much bigger than our individual reactions to it. We have to go outside ourselves and take the macro view, not the micro.

 

[SexySteph]

When I say "not all men" I'm specifically talking about me

I want to reassure them and say I'm sorry they feel like that, please know there are good men in the world too

Words are sort of empty and meaningless though. Yeah, we all know there are good men in the world, why do you need to tell us? Saying that doesn't change anything and it definitely doesn't prove that you're one of them either. In fact, my rapist actually had a similar conversation early in our relationship. And him saying "not all men though! I'd never hurt you" didn't prove that he wouldn't rape me, cuz he did.

 

[JickyJuly]

Ahh. I see what you're saying @MFCGod . You dislike that a woman passing you might fear you. But, women grow up in a world that teaches them strange men can be a threat. How we are taught to handle that varies. Ultimately, seeing you as a threat isn't a dig at you. It's a dig at the current state of things. It sucks that any woman would have to fear you without knowing you just by walking past you in the street. I agree. The situation hurts us all. Gender equality means coming together to heal that. If you're focused on "BUT I"M NOT A THREAT!" it doesn't really fix anything. Instead of being upset by how the situation hits you, be mad at those who have raped or shamed.

Most men aren't a threat. Men are awesome. Most men when sitting across from a woman they care about hearing that she is a rape victim would NOT interrupt her to say "Hey. I'm not a rapist". Most men in that position would listen, comfort and want to protect. Unfortunately, most women aren't going to sit down and have that conversation with the men who love her. So, hearing about rape is going to be a less connected experience. In a less personal conversation, it's harder to focus on the important parts and not get hypothetical and defensive. We all need to try harder to hear the real problems.

 

[JoleneBrody]

Jicky.
you're just my favorite brain ever.

 

[Gen]

In that second tweet, she pretty much says she is scared of every random man she see's out and about - I am a random man you will see out and about

It's upsetting to me that someone might see me walking down the street, fear me and label me as a rapist

It doesn't just upset my ego, it's upsetting they have to carry that fear with them

When I say "not all men" I'm specifically talking about me

I want to reassure them and say I'm sorry they feel like that, please know there are good men in the world too

^ Saying you can't say "not all men" takes that away from me

I'm not trying to end the discussion by saying "not all men" either, it's just a way to continue the discussion without feeling like you're talking to me thinking I am the evil you're scared of

But I'm just repeating myself over and over now, maybe I'm just not expressing myself very eloquently.

I think I get what you're getting at! And I agree & empathize with a lot of it.

But I do also think that women know most men aren't rapists, we know that the vast majority of the time when we cross the street so we don't pass a dude at night, he wasn't going to assault us. He's probably a good dude, like most are. So we don't need to be reassured or told you're one of the good ones, because that kind of derails the conversation into the woman having to say "I know, you're great" and then it's about reassuring you rather than her just being able to vent/discuss her problem.

I think it's just an unnecessary way to turn the discussion into something personal when it isn't, and to center the conversation around you when it never was. If we're talking about how we feel unsafe walking at night, and you're saying that hurts your feelings, it seems like you're prioritizing your own interpreted version of the situation over her own fear for her safety. And that's kind of crummy. If you want to reassure and support the ladies in your life (or in general), I think letting them discuss their feelings without interjecting like that is probably better.

(Everyone chimed in faster than me But I think it's an interesting discussion, thank you for starting it!)

 

[mynameisbob84]

I was thinking about this while I walked to/back from the shop

I do have an ego about being a good person, it's one of the main things I take pride in as a human being

When reading something like that tweet, being pigeonholed as a rapist without even being able to proclaim my innocence, of course that's going to be a road block for wanting me to read on and be open; If I first have to agree I'm a monster or part of the problem, I can't do that, it goes too far against my view of self and reality.

When expressing opinions, how you say them is often just as important as what you're saying, they have to be made palatable otherwise there's no point saying them

Being intolerant of man saying "I'm not like that" is counter productive, puts up a road block, might as well end the conversation there.

I agree with this to an extent. I think blanket statements like "men are rapists" ultimately do more harm than good, as one half of the discussion is (rightly or wrongly) automatically on the defensive. But I think it's just one of those things you kinda have to let go, ya know? The wider dialogue is too important to get hung up on semantics. It's never pleasant to be lumped in with rapists but it must be a million times better than having to worry about which men in your life or which men you meet in a club or walk by in the street of a night might rape you.

 

[MFCGod]

When a woman/women are trying to explain their experiences with men and the overall culture, that is just the wrong damned time to say "not all men." The only correct thing to do is keep your mouth shut and your ears open at that point. They know not all men.

I understand, but in context this isn't a personal interaction between me and someone else, obviously that's very different.

I'm referring to statements put out publicly on social media that from how they're worded, rather than help, will more likely alienate people reading (because of the reasons I've said previously)

@JickyJuly I agree with everything you said, well put.

 

[gingerhobbit]

I understand, but in context this isn't a personal interaction between me and someone else, obviously that's very different.

I'm referring to statements put out publicly on social media that from how they're worded, rather than help, will more likely alienate people reading (because of the reasons I've said previously.

It applies whether in individual conversation or a broader context. And, as others have said, I think what you're seeing is from a subset of feminists who don't speak for everyone.

 

[Worship Jaclyn]

I'm glad some people are listening to what he is saying because if you want to express how you feel about rape but are unwilling to listen to how men take it then you are failing. We need to have this communication so we can all have a better understanding of how the other one feels and maybe change the way we communicate about these issues so we are better heard.

As for @JickyJuly 's comment. I don't really see rape culture as coddling men and teaching women to be afraid? I was very understanding toward @MFCGod but didn't see myself as coddling him. It's okay to say "I understand that you feel that way". I mean, isn't that what feminists who make these statements want to hear? Also, it will be a cold day in hell that I teach my daughter to be afraid of men. I will have realistic conversations with her but fear isn't something I will be teaching. Though teaching fear would yes be very much encouraging rape culture. Which is a shame since that is exactly what extremist feminists do, teach fear and encourage the very thing they are trying to end.

 

[JickyJuly]

Oh no @AriaGray . I don't think anyone actually got coddled in this thread. But, I think men are used to having their feelings cared for in a way that validates them in conversations that are hard to have. I don't plan to teach my daughters to fear anyone either. I will insist that they have some sort of self defense training before being drivers. But, I will fear for them in a way that I don't fear for myself. I hope that they won't be as scrappy as I am or need to be. I don't know. I hope the world is a little different before they are grown.

 

[ramblin]

Thoughts...

Generalizing

Generalizing sucks. I try pretty hard to avoid saying "women this" or "blacks that" or "seniors the other." I expect others to avoid saying "men this" or "whites that" or "middle-aged people the other." It does rub me the wrong way to be lumped in with a viewpoint or action or state of being that doesn't apply to me. Most of the time it happens as an unconscious shorthand for "many men" or "too many whites". It's usually worthy of a polite reminder, but not a major derail of a valid conversation.

Rape Culture - 98%

Steph already provided the link, but I'll put it right in the thread, 'cause it's important.
* Two thirds of rapes are never reported to police (Justice Department, National Crime Victimzization Survey: 2008-2012)
* Of those, four in five don't lead to an arrest (FBI, Uniform Crime Reports, Arrest Data: 2006-2010)
* Of those, about half are not referred to prosecutors (Department of Justice, Felony Defendents in Large Urban Counties: 2009)
* Of those, about one third do not lead to a felony conviction (Department Justice, Felony Defendents in Large Urban Counties: 2009)

The problem clearly is a cultural one, not just a legal one. Two thirds felony conviction rate isn't the biggest problem here, it's that 97% that never make it to court because the victim is understandably unwilling or unable to fight the onslaught of doubt and victim blaming that uniquely accompany this particular crime.

Feminism, "anti-feminism", and color/gender blindness

We've had long discussions on the word "feminist" before. As folks have been saying, there's a niche of radical feminism that does believe all men are rapists, and another niche that believes that feminism means that we can't make distinctions between the genders at all. The feminism I subscribe to has a long history, and is ultimately the belief that women are people. Not the same people as men, but not less people either. Same goes for race.

I'll link the Joss Whedon video again.



M&Ms analogy for assault

I think the statistic is that one in five M&M consumers will encounter a lethal dose of cyanide (by age 24, or in college, or in their lifetime depending on the survey), rather than that one in five M&Ms contains that lethal dose. Still scary, deserving of caution, and something we should all be doing what we can to address.

 

[Nordling]

A little about the comments about being leery of men when alone on the street or similar. It reminds me of my feelings toward strange dogs. I count myself as a dog lover...any time I see a dog I want to rush over and pet them, and in most cases, the dogs in question would feel the same way. Unfortunately, having been bitten by dogs a couple times as a small child, I always am leery of strange dogs until I can know for sure their intent--even though mean dogs are a tiny minority.

In other words, it isn't about being negative toward men (or dogs), it's about simply being prudent when we know that a potential danger always exists until we can know for sure "what" someone is.

 

[SexySteph]

Rape Culture - 98%
The problem clearly is a cultural one, not just a legal one. Two thirds felony conviction rate isn't the biggest problem here, it's that 97% that never make it to court because the victim is understandably unwilling or unable to fight the onslaught of doubt and victim blaming that uniquely accompany this particular crime.

I just wanted to add to this and say that often it's not just the victim that keeps it out of the courts. Many times the DA doesn't feel the case is strong enough to guarantee a conviction so it's not pursued. They'll basically tell you "I don't think I can win so let's just let it go".

 

[gingerhobbit]

I just wanted to add to this and say that often it's not just the victim that keeps it out of the courts. Many times the DA doesn't feel the case is strong enough to guarantee a conviction so it's not pursued. They'll basically tell you "I don't think I can win so let's just let it go".

The following might be a trigger for anyone who has experienced a sexual assault.


Yeah, prosecutors are usually pretty reluctant to try cases unless they're sure they can win. Not defending that, but just to add some perspective:

Sex crimes are extremely difficult to prove from an evidentiary standpoint.

Evidence comes in three types - eyewitness, physical and circumstantial - and usually all three are pretty weak in rape cases.

Witness testimony: There are usually only two people who know what happened, the accuser and the accused. It's fairly rare for there to be independent witnesses to a sex crime. At most, you have witness testimony of the events leading up to and after the assault.

So, often it boils down to a he said/she said. That by itself is not enough probable cause for an arrest, and if it does get to court, as evidence, it just comes down to who the jury finds more believable - and rapists can put on good performances in court.

Also, eyewitness testimony is notoriously inaccurate, especially when making cross-racial identifications. There have been many cases where the victim was positive the person arrested was the one who raped her, when DNA shows it was someone else.

Physical evidence: Obviously semen is the best evidence, followed by blood, or a pubic hair with the follicle attached. That's why victims are supposed to go straight to the ER so a qualified sexual assault nurse-examiner can complete a rape kit before bathing. But many victims don't report until hours or days later, after they've bathed and that evidence is lost. Also, it's getting extremely common for sex crime suspects to use condoms. They watch TV too.

Even if there is physical evidence, that is not a slam dunk. Like I mentioned in another post, there is a massive backlog of unprocessed rape kits in most major jurisdictions. And we're not talking about delays of weeks, or even months, but years. In that time, victims decide it's not worth it to continue, witnesses move away, paperwork gets lost and cases fall apart. Also, once the rape kit is processed and there is a DNA profile, that only helps if there is a suspect to match it with or if the suspect's DNA is in CODIS.

So maybe you get lucky, the stars align and you get a DNA match with your suspect. He's toast, right? Nope, not by a long shot. Remember, the majority of rapes are between people who know each other. His defense attorney will say, sure, my client had sex with the victim - but it was completely consensual. She's just having buyer's remorse. What about the vaginal bruising and tearing, the twist fractures, the bruises on her arms and legs consistent with restraint? She asked for it rough, the defense attorney says.

Circumstantial evidence: This is the common sense stuff. Suspect and victim are at a party, they are seen going into a bedroom together, suddenly she screams and runs out with her clothing torn and she says he raped her. Or, they're on a date, they're seen at dinner, at a bar, they leave together, a little while later, she calls the police and reports a rape, and has the injuries to support her story.

Circumstantial cases are always a very tough sell with a jury. If the majority of the evidence is circumstantial, no matter how likely it looks that the rape occurred, the jury will often reject it. Especially if there is no physical evidence. Juries now expect to have fibers, hairs, DNA and fingerprints in every case. Prosecutors call it the "CSI effect." Most of what people know about crime-solving is what they get off TV, so they expects loads of forensics, when often there just isn't any.

And this may seem counter-intuitive, but you know who is the hardest to convince on the jury in a rape case? The women. Prosecutors do not like having a jury full of women when they are trying a rape case. It's not that the women side with the rapist - it's that they judge the victim. God forbid that she was drunk (alcohol is involved in a lot of rapes), had sex with the suspect on past occasions, was dressed provocatively, or has had many sexual partners in the past. Jurors will hold that against the victim.

And remember, it only takes one juror to stop a conviction.

This is why such a small percentage of sexual assault cases end with jail time for the accused. These types of cases are so different from most other types of felonies. In a murder, you've got the body, a weapon, physical evidence, circumstantial, witnesses. In a robbery, usually witnesses and physical evidence, including whatever was stolen. In a rape, you often just have the victim's word.

And that's just the reality of it.

Hope this helped.

ETA: There's one strong exception that I've seen to all of the above. If you get a smart investigator and a resourceful victim, and the suspect is someone the victim knows, they can do what is called a "controlled call." The victim makes a phone call to the suspect and brings up the rape, asking something like "what happened?" or a more direct "why did you do that to me?" In some cases, the suspect will make some excuse for what he did, or offer an apology or in some other way make an admission of guilt. The investigator, of course, is recording the call. If the call survives the defense attorney's motion to suppress, it often leads to the suspect copping a plea because a jury will convict him.

 

[ramblin]

Hope this helped.

It does. It's familiar, but you put it very well.

Though, if the stats above are to be believed, only the 1/3 of those "referred to prosecutors" don't result in conviction. It seems as if the DAs are taking the cases that get to them, but they may be discouraging the police from ever making the referrals or arrests? I've certainly heard many cases of the police discouraging victims from pushing forward with horror stories of the impact of exposure, the risk that the accused may be found innocent, inability to protect the victim, etc.

 

[kylexy]

@kylexy, you'll also find examples of black people from the 60s and 70s who swore that racism wasn't that bad. Hell, you can still see them on Fox News. You can always find members of a particular group who will deny anything bad is being done to their own people, despite the reality. That doesn't mean they aren't full of shit.

There has also always been people who exaggerate things so I don't see your point. I have never said that bad things never happen. They ofc. do and it's a problem. The step from admitting that to saying we live in a rape culture is, however, quite big.

You call your pov (because that's what it is) "reality" and that I'm full of shit. Sure, if that's the approach you like to have I guess further discussion will take us nowhere. I choose to see it as we have different opinions.

Have a nice day

 

[fandango]

Why is that when confronted with overwhelming evidence some people still choose to believe the one tiny bit that just makes them feel better instead of facing the reality?

 

[gingerhobbit]

It does. It's familiar, but you put it very well.

Though, if the stats above are to be believed, only the 1/3 of those "referred to prosecutors" don't result in conviction. It seems as if the DAs are taking the cases that get to them, but they may be discouraging the police from ever making the referrals or arrests? I've certainly heard many cases of the police discouraging victims from pushing forward with horror stories of the impact of exposure, the risk that the accused may be found innocent, inability to protect the victim, etc.

I'm always very skeptical of sex crime stats just because of the wide variations in the number. Just look at the enormous gap between the number of rapes reported by the FBI and the number reported by the CDC. Like we talked about in another thread, UCR data is far from infallible. Even the FBI warns against drawing conclusions based only on the annual UCR reports because there are just too many holes in the reporting system. And even the very definition of rape varies by jurisdiction. For example, the feebs only count it as rape if there is penetration, while in Florida, sexual battery only requires contact between genitals (because a lot of rapists have trouble getting it up, so there is no penile penetration).

With convictions, again the stats have wide variations, but BJS puts it about 35 percent.

Quoting: "The probability that a defendant would eventually be convicted of the original felony charge was highest for those charged with a driving-related offense (64%), murder (60%), or drug trafficking (55%). The lowest probability was for those charged with rape (35%) and assault (33%)."

Nationally, the average conviction rate for felonies in general is about 65-70 percent. So if, and against I stress if, the number above is accurate for sex crimes convictions, that means rape cases end in conviction about half as often as the typical felony. That's terrible - a prosecutor with a 35 percent conviction record would soon be looking for a new job.

I don't know for certain, but I would be willing to bet the conviction rate for sex crimes in federal court are much higher. The reason is that federal court rules are stacked against the defendant from the get-go, resulting in an average conviction rate for all federal cases that is somewhere in the high 90s.

On prosecutors taking or not taking cases, the way it works for felonies in many, probably most, jurisdictions is that the law enforcement investigators work the case, then refer it to the state attorney (what we call the DA in Florida) for review.

A lot of times, the state attorney will amend the charges, often downgrading them to something they think they can prove. That's why cops often do what's called "stacking the charges," which basically just means adding a bunch of charges in hopes that at least one or two will survive the review.

Ultimately, it's the prosecutor, not the cops, who decides if an arrest will even be made. Then the prosecutor makes a decision about whether to take it to trial, offer a plea or nolle prosse it. The decision whether to go to trial depends heavily on the prosecutor and the political climate in that particular state attorney's office. Many prosecutors I've known were willing to chance it at trial. A few had such a hard-on for violent crime, they would take anything to trial. And there've been a few really timid ones, but the cops spread the word about them pretty quickly and avoid taking them cases, if possible.

Still, the majority of prosecutors will only take a case to trial if it has high chance of winning, partly out of concern for their careers but also because a lot of them believe, rightly, that it is an irresponsible waste of public resources to try a case that is a likely loser.

With rape cases being so difficult to prove, yeah, prosecutors scrutinize them extremely closely before giving the green light on an arrest, and even more when deciding whether to take it to trial. They just have to.

With the cops and rape victims, man that is a real crap-shoot. I mentioned somewhere else that when I first started working in Miami back in the 90s, the sex crimes unit at the city PD was known as the 'Pussy Posse," which shows you how seriously they took their jobs. Other cops take it much, much more seriously. I knew a female sergeant who ran a sex crimes unit in another town in Florida who would literally kick your ass if she heard you making light of a rape case.

Many investigators think it is very important to explain to the victim what she will have to go through if she presses a case, and I agree with them. Rape cases depend on the victim more than any other major felony, so the victim has to be rock-solid all the way to the end. The process is brutal, and if they aren't prepared for it, they will crumble and the case will fall apart. It's not a matter of discouraging her from moving forward, but of doing the right thing and responsibly informing her.

Now, that said, yes, there are cops who will try to talk a victim out of going ahead for various reasons. I worked a private case once where the assigned investigator actively discouraged the victim from pressing because the suspect was a minor local somebody that the cop admired. His work, or lack of it, tainted the case enough that it tanked and the victim had to take the case civil, where she won.

One thing, though, that you rarely see on TV (because it isn't sexy, I guess) is that a lot of law enforcement agencies have victim advocate units that are supposed to prevent just this sort of thing. Victim advocates are trained social workers who are assigned to the victims in violent crime cases and are there specifically to hold the victim's hand and to act as a buffer between the victim and the system. They usually roll to the crime scene or the hospital, so they're part of the case from the start. In my experience, victim advocates work very closely with the investigators, in the same office, and tend to be fiercely protective of their victims. They are the ones who do the most to prepare a victim for what is going to happen in the court process - and they make sure cops don't do stupid shit like try to discourage a rape victim.

Man, I always end up writing way more than I intended.

Hope it helped.

There has also always been people who exaggerate things so I don't see your point. I have never said that bad things never happen. They ofc. do and it's a problem. The step from admitting that to saying we live in a rape culture is, however, quite big.

You call your pov (because that's what it is) "reality" and that I'm full of shit. Sure, if that's the approach you like to have I guess further discussion will take us nowhere. I choose to see it as we have different opinions.

Have a nice day

@kylexy I call my POV on this topic "reality" for the same reason climate change is considered reality in the scientific community - because there is widespread consensus from the people in the best positions to know that it is actually happening. Just the fact that so many men want to shout down women who talk about rape culture is evidence of the very thing.

The "full of shit" thing wasn't directed at you. I was referring to people from a particular group who deny something like racism or rape culture is happening to their group...especially the ones who then allow themselves to be used as puppets by those who would prefer to maintain the status quo. And yes, they are full of shit.

 

[AmberCutie]

Who thinks you're a monster or a rapist? There's a step in this thought process that I am missing.

Imagine that there's a bowl of M&Ms. 1 in 5 of those M&Ms contain a lethal dose of cyanide. You're going to be slightly cautious around each of those M&Ms until you're sure that it's safe. To act otherwise would be dangerous. So yeah, maybe it's hurtful to your feelings but until you're sure that a stranger isn't going to put you in danger you should probably be careful around them.

I think maybe he's sad because the way things are worded, in a lot of cases... he feels like people automatically are considering him to be a cyanide M&M. And stating up front that he isn't is viewed as a problem (i.e. using the phrase "not all men" is a shit-upon thing) I can see how that could be upsetting.

I could be completely missing it, though, but seeing these posts one after the other in succession just struck me as the perfect example.

 

[AmberCutie]

And I should have just kept reading instead of replying, as this post is super:

Ahh. I see what you're saying @MFCGod . You dislike that a woman passing you might fear you. But, women grow up in a world that teaches them strange men can be a threat. How we are taught to handle that varies. Ultimately, seeing you as a threat isn't a dig at you. It's a dig at the current state of things. It sucks that any woman would have to fear you without knowing you just by walking past you in the street. I agree. The situation hurts us all. Gender equality means coming together to heal that. If you're focused on "BUT I"M NOT A THREAT!" it doesn't really fix anything. Instead of being upset by how the situation hits you, be mad at those who have raped or shamed.

Most men aren't a threat. Men are awesome. Most men when sitting across from a woman they care about hearing that she is a rape victim would NOT interrupt her to say "Hey. I'm not a rapist". Most men in that position would listen, comfort and want to protect. Unfortunately, most women aren't going to sit down and have that conversation with the men who love her. So, hearing about rape is going to be a less connected experience. In a less personal conversation, it's harder to focus on the important parts and not get hypothetical and defensive. We all need to try harder to hear the real problems.

 

[marchards]

They're not saying that it doesn't exist though. They're basically saying "yeah, rape culture is totally a thing but if we look at it as a whole we can never escape it, we need to break it down to the individual issues" sort of like when your house is a mess, if you look at it and just go "wow, my whole house is a mess" you're not going to fix it unless you break it down into smaller pieces and work on each individual piece.

That's part of the problem with "rape culture". It's packing a bunch of issues into one big mess that doesn't work, because as a whole it's simplistic and completely fails to explain anything. They specifically recommended against using the phrase "rape culture" because it's extremely "unhelpful". I would humbly suggest the obvious reason why that's true. Nowhere in that document do they say that it's "totally a thing". At all.

I've asked a bunch of people who believe in "rape culture" to explain themselves and it always ends with them being frustrated at me (as though I was the cause of the logical inconsistencies in their arguments). It sounds great for about five seconds, but when you start asking questions and looking stuff up and applying logic, it just doesn't make any sense.

 

[MFCGod]

I think maybe he's sad because the way things are worded, in a lot of cases... he feels like people automatically are considering him to be a cyanide M&M. And stating up front that he isn't is viewed as a problem (i.e. using the phrase "not all men" is a shit-upon thing) I can see how that could be upsetting..

Yes exactly

I think it's important the context too; I'm talking specifically about public posts that I assume are trying to at raise awareness, create discussion etc; people on their soapbox

Positive and progressive discussions can't include shaming innocent people, pre-judging them by the deeds of others who just happen to be of the same gender; it just alienates.

If you want your message to be heard and effective, you have to make it palatable for everyone, not exclusive

 

[AmberCutie]

Yes exactly

I think it's important the context too; I'm talking specifically about public posts that I assume are trying to at raise awareness, create discussion etc; people on their soapbox

Positive and progressive discussions can't include shaming innocent people, pre-judging them by the deeds of others who just happen to be of the same gender; it just alienates.

If you want your message to be heard and effective, you have to make it palatable for everyone, not exclusive

I'm sure I'm not the only one here that will agree that it's unfortunate that a great amount of the vocal majority for any social issue (not just this problem) are somewhat extremist and vicious with their wording. It doesn't do a positive service for their cause. But the reason their voices are so heard is because they cause such an outcry (whether in extreme agreement or extreme disagreement) that their quotes and screenshots of their quotes get spread around like wildfire. Then those who are not as educated on the subject begin to believe that's how the entire movement feels and thinks, and everything snowballs from there.

 

[MFCGod]

I'm sure I'm not the only one here that will agree that it's unfortunate that a great amount of the vocal majority for any social issue (not just this problem) are unfortunately somewhat extremist and vicious with their wording. It doesn't do a positive service for their cause. But the reason their voices are so heard is because they cause such an outcry (whether in extreme agreement or extreme disagreement) that their quotes and screenshots of their quotes get spread around like wildfire. Then those who are not as educated on the subject begin to believe that's how the entire movement feels and thinks, and everything snowballs from there.

I did try and portray that sentiment in my original post

*The same as I think it's a shame that "conspiracy theory" has become synonyms with "fantasy", "feminism" for me has become "anti-men" instead of "pro-women" *

Woops meant to put synonymous*

I guess like in some peoples minds the actions of certain men, get all men then get tarred with the same brush, the actions of certain feminists have soured my view of feminism, which probably isn't fair on the majority of feminists

I suppose at least being called a "feminist" is a choice though, you can always come up with a different term, but you will always be the gender you were born as.

 

[HiGirlsRHot]

I think one of the problems is the term rape is such a loaded word that when added it to culture, it encourages anger instead of dialogue. Add to that the silliness of trying to discuss anything serious on twitter and you have the ingredients for a total twitter shit storm.

As professor Sommers points out most of the more sensational reports are based on flawed surveys and sensationalized interpretation.


By the standards many of the surveys use, I have been a victim of sexual assault 3 times. However, I don't seriously think that have a drunken sorority girl grab my balls several times and try to make out with me a party really makes me a crime victim, although I was pretty embarrassed.

The number of unambiguous rape is relatively small. This is the type of assault where you don't know the attacker at all other than perhaps saying hello to him once on the street. About 1% of American are victims of violent crime each year and rape is about .1% (higher for woman 18-30).

The problem is the more ambiguous rape cases. The classic case being you meet a guy a party you get drunk and/or high you start making out. You decide that you aren't comfortable having sex. You think you tell him to stop, but you are both pretty drunk so who know what actually is said. You wake in the morning and you are pretty sure you had sex but don't remember it. Could this be rape? Yes, is it always?, Certainly not. It is understandable why woman would fell victimized in this situation, but also feel reluctant to report it. As a side note the 150,000 person Crime Victimization survey asks people to describe what has happened to them in the last 6 months, so it capture these ambiguous situations. So when people say that rape is under reported crime it is true (37%). However not all of these reports are actual crimes, in the beyond a reasonable doubt level.

A third situation is you and your SO get into big fight. He kisses you. Last time you had angry sex it was fantastic. Tonight you are still pissed off and you say no and he doesn't stop. At some point you stop protesting and start participating. Is this rape? Again, it could be but I think a jury, would have a hard time convicting him, unless you pack up and leave the next day.

This to me falls in the coerced sex category, and interestingly enough the DOJ collects statistic on this but I have not seen it reported.

43A. Incidents involving forced or unwanted sexual acts are often difficult to talk about. (Other than any incidents already mentioned,) have you been forced or coerced to engage in unwanted sexual activity by -

. (a) Someone you didn't know - (b) A casual acquaintance - OR (c) Someone you know well?

I agree that men coerce woman to have sex is a problem in society. If you believe that all three examples fall into rape culture than yes we live in in a rape culture.

But to me ISIS is a rape culture, and I guess my question is the US rape culture than watch this documentary and tell me how you we describe ISIS?

 

[JoleneBrody]

So "rape culture" is not a term I use although I would definitely consider myself a feminist who does not wish to be associated with the tumblr extremists.

But I'm curious, does "rape culture" even mean the same thing to everyone or is the definition more fluid and based on personal views/experience?

I can see what people are talking about when they refer to rape culture but I personally see those key points as only parts of a MUCH larger problem with our society as a whole and do worry a little bit that we are missing a much more important key in correcting the issue by focusing TOO closely, if that makes sense?
Our completely fucked up judicial system, sexual inequality, lack of proper sex education and a culture completely immersed in self righteous entitlement. You combine all of those things with our societies obsession with violence and the results are many.

On a personal level, I can only think of maybe one of my close girlfriends I've had since middle school/high school that HASN'T been sexually assaulted, so when I see people argue against the frequency of sexual assault, I get a little irritated, because my personal experience is MUCH higher than the number they are even arguing against.
Statistics are almost always skewed and the media or organizations will always manipulate data to fit their agenda, no matter the side. I prefer to base my opinions on personal experience and I think that was the power behind the #yesallwomen movement when it started and I was sad it ended up turning so ugly and counter productive. It wasn't statistics and numbers, it was real people sharing their stories to help people understand.

I honestly do think it's getting better! The majority of inappropriate comments and street harassment I receive is from much older men, only rarely from younger men.
I mean, most drive by cat calls as they are speeding away are younger dudes but the blatant space invading, approaching, touching and following seems to be coming from an older generation... or at least that is my personal experience.
I like to think that MAYBE this is a sign that on a grand generational scale men are becoming less sexist and disrespectful of a woman's right to consent.

Wow this is really all over the place. Sorry, it's been on my mind since while out walking with the Content Camp ladies one night for no more than 45 minutes maybe, I can recall at least 5 times one of us was harassed by a man in a very invasive way and even caught myself not defending us because it felt like it could escalate to scary very easily a few times. I don't go out much, let alone without a group that includes some other men so the sheer volume really got me feeling and thinking lately.

TLDR: Is Rape Culture a particular definition or open to interpretation, if so what does it mean to you?