User Tag List

First 3979878889909199139 Last

Results 881 to 890 of 1614

  1. #881
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    834

    Default

    Men's rights groups can't get 5$ to purchase a decent microphone... That made me sad

    Quote Originally Posted by Red Herring View Post
    And when the self-identified feminists on the forum (as well as just about every single one I have met offline) distance themselves from those positions until they're blue in the mouth, does that not suggest that these positions are in fact not an essential part of feminism (or gender egalitarianism or whatever you decide to baptise the baby) but a fringe phenomenon and an all too easy strawman?
    If these fringe feminists are the ones you actually disagree with, why aren't any of you good old equality feminists arguing with any of them instead of with Spanky?

  2. #882
    El Papagayo Osprey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/so
    Socionics
    LII None
    Posts
    8,445

    Default

    I'm genuinely pretty baffled about what was supposed to be objectionable about the #notallmen hashtag. Why is it offensive to say that all men don't rape women? Why is such a statement controversial?

    This statement is not directed towards those who find nothing controversial about that statement. I'm interested in hearing the opinions of the people who find controversy in the statement that all men don't rape women. I don't know if there are any here, but I have met them in other places.
    Forget the dead you've left; they will not follow you.
    The vagabond who is rapping at your door, is standing in the clothes you once wore


    Visit my Johari: http://kevan.org/johari?name=Birddude78

  3. #883
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    834

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by msg_v2 View Post
    I'm pretty baffled about what was supposed to be objectionable about the #notallmen hashtag. Why is it offensive to say that all men don't rape women? Why is such a statement controversial?
    Here's a few examples for the feminist perspective:
    Can someone explain what's wrong with the "it's not all men" argument when referring to the perpetrators of sex crimes?

    The logical problem with it as a form of argument is that it's a defensive and largely irrelevant response to a very common tendency in speech to generalize for the sake of simplicity.
    I'll give an example, a paraphrase of something I read in the last few days (but can't remember where - oops):
    Say there's a headline that reads: "Study shows texting drivers usually at fault in car-pedestrian accidents" with a lede arguing something like, "Experts reiterate that drivers should avoid distraction while driving."
    Now imagine the comment section below that article. Odds are you aren't picturing a thread littered with comments like, "But I drive and I've never hit a pedestrian!" or "No driver I know would ever text and drive - this can't be that big of a problem" or "Really, all pedestrians have to do is stay on the sidewalk and look both ways, and this wouldn't be a problem at all!" or "Not all drivers drive distracted - you're tarring all automobile operators with the same brush!"
    That reaction is ludicrous - no one would read the hypothetical headline and assume that it was implying that every single driver ever texts and drives all the time. Further, no one who drove with their phone responsibly tucked in their bag would be likely to be so upset by the apparent implication that they did text and drive that they would comment with an angry accusation of over-generalization.
    But somehow, similar headlines pointing out gender-related structural inequality and sexism, or reflecting individual women's thoughts about their own lives and experiences, trigger these tidal waves of defensiveness and (faux? who knows) outrage. As if the inclusion of the element of gender as a theme renders people incapable of understanding context and narrative/journalistic conventions.
    That's why the "Not All Men" response generates eye-rolling and sarcastic memes.

    Maybe this example will clarify:
    I travel for business, often alone.
    When I get into town late and go to the hotel bar for dinner, if there are more than 5 or 6 male business travelers present, I'm almost guaranteed to deal with some level of sexual harassment, usually minor and I can blow it off and continue happily with my life. Rarely but possibly full on groping or insults for saying no, once or twice bad enough I had to stay there in public until they left & get an escort for fear of being followed to my room.
    Obviously from my description, not all men in that situation are going to bother me, most of them aren't. But it's close to inevitable that I will be bothered.
    "Not all men" implies I should pat 98% of the dudes in the room on the head for not being jerks and acting like I'm a fellow person traveling for work & just want some dinner after my flight.
    That does absolutely nothing toward addressing the fact that minor sexual harassment is a normal part of me doing my job to pay my rent like everyone else.
    If we can get through my experience without derailing the conversation - we can get to a useful part of the conversation.
    What, for example, are the "not all men" doing in that hotel bar when the bad apple is misbehaving?
    I've only ever seen 3 different responses from the good guys who aren't harassing:
    (Most common) Not noticing
    Noticing, but turning a blind eye because they don't want to get involved
    (Rare, but jaw-droppingly awful) come over to reassure me by saying something like "you're okay, right, you know he's just trying to have a little fun"
    Obligatory disclaimers: saying that x is a problem doesn't mean I believe it's the the worst thing imaginable, it doesn't mean other problems don't also deserve independent effort to improve.
    But just maybe, if enough women can tell their stories without "not all men" derailing discussions, we can at least fix the "not noticing" part.

    The problem with that statement is that while it's not exclusively men, it is a very heavy *majority" of men perpetrating those things. "Not all men" is a useless statement, because we know it's not all of them - if it was, we'd all already be dead. Not only is it useless, it's also allowing people to feel like they're not part of the problem in anyway, but without really acknowledging the problem and its ramifications in the first place.
    "More men should say 'Don't be that guy' to other men, and less 'Not all men' to women."

    Source: TwoXChromosomes, a subreddit for both serious and silly content, and intended for women's perspectives.
    TL-DR: Same problems as "Not all feminists".

  4. #884
    El Papagayo Osprey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/so
    Socionics
    LII None
    Posts
    8,445

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarlaxle
    I've only ever seen 3 different responses from the good guys who aren't harassing

    (Most common) Not noticing
    (Rare, but jaw-droppingly awful) come over to reassure me by saying something like "you're okay, right, you know he's just trying to have a little fun"
    Obligatory disclaimers: saying that x is a problem doesn't mean I believe it's the the worst thing imaginable, it doesn't mean other problems don't also deserve independent effort to improve.
    2 & 3 kind of have a point, but what is supposed to be the fix for 1? I generally don't notice this stuff going on. I don't deny that happens, but I rarely see it. The last time I did notice was when it happened to my girlfriend, and you can be sure I said something then.

    There's also a subetext of "collective responsibility for the actions of a few" which I'm extremely uncomfortable with. I don't think somebody in one group has a responsibility for something another member of that group does, and I find contrary notions to be antithetical to humanism. I can intervene at the level of the individual. I can't intervene at the level of the group.
    Forget the dead you've left; they will not follow you.
    The vagabond who is rapping at your door, is standing in the clothes you once wore


    Visit my Johari: http://kevan.org/johari?name=Birddude78

  5. #885
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    834

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by msg_v2 View Post
    There's also a sense of "collective responsibility for the actions of a few" which I'm extremely uncomfortable with. I don't think somebody in one group has a responsibility for something another member of that group does, and I find contrary notions to be antithetical to humanism.
    I think you need to look at a couple of factors here:
    1. Is it a group given by birth or joined by choice?
    2. Is it an actively organized group with shared goals?
    3. How much impact can individuals have within the organization?

    To apply this to the topic:

    • To be a man is not something you have a choice about.
    • To be part of a frat house that covers up for rape, is.


    • To be a woman is not something you have a choice about.
    • To give your support to gender-biased lobbyists, is.


    Edit:
    I thought the first /r comment actually made the most reasonable argument - I agree with her that the biggest problem with notallX is how its used a a red herring to deflect from the impact of those who do. In all likelihood a very small percentage of men actually rape, but they are good enough at getting away with it that they impact a much larger percentage of women. Its possible only 0.1% of feminists would support NOW's appeal against shared parenthood bill but if that's the case, the 99.9% aren't the ones who made the political impact. Real life consequences are measured not by the percentage of people who do it but by how much of it gets done.

    The 2nd comment has a problem of entitlement, holding people at fault for not risking themselves in a confrontation and coming to help. The 3rd one just replaces AllMen with MostMen, which misses the point that either one is still vilifying people for their gender which they have no control or choice over, ironically demonstrating in her beliefs exactly why "not all men" is necessary.

  6. #886
    Lex Parsimoniae Xander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    9w8
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    4,463

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by msg_v2 View Post
    I'm genuinely pretty baffled about what was supposed to be objectionable about the #notallmen hashtag. Why is it offensive to say that all men don't rape women? Why is such a statement controversial?

    This statement is not directed towards those who find nothing controversial about that statement. I'm interested in hearing the opinions of the people who find controversy in the statement that all men don't rape women. I don't know if there are any here, but I have met them in other places.
    I'd find that insulting. It shouldn't even need to be said. It almost infers that these men are the exception.
    Isn't it time for a colourful metaphor?
    Likes SpankyMcFly, N/A liked this post

  7. #887

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Xander View Post
    I'd find that insulting. It shouldn't even need to be said. It almost infers that these men are the exception.
    Not to mention that it is a counter to a position that nobody should seriously hold in the first place.
    i.e. it's essentially knocking down a strawman.
    Likes SpankyMcFly, N/A liked this post

  8. #888

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by msg_v2 View Post
    I'm genuinely pretty baffled about what was supposed to be objectionable about the #notallmen hashtag. Why is it offensive to say that all men don't rape women? Why is such a statement controversial?

    This statement is not directed towards those who find nothing controversial about that statement. I'm interested in hearing the opinions of the people who find controversy in the statement that all men don't rape women. I don't know if there are any here, but I have met them in other places.
    It's a response to a position that doesn't actually exist, and is almost reverse psychologically passive aggressive.

    Saying that "not all men rape women" is meant to be a counterpoint to the position that "all men rape women" which means it is implying that there is a consensus somewhere that all men rape women, and this isn't really the case. Or at least such an idea should not be taken seriously from the very few who would propose such a thing.

    It'd be like if I said "Not all TypoCentral users rape camels." It implies that there's a running stereotype that TypoC users are prone to camel rape and tries to make a counterpoint that there's some who don't do that. It addresses a stance that is not held by anyone worth listening to, and would be a form of strawman.
    Likes Osprey, Mane, SpankyMcFly, Ivy, N/A liked this post

  9. #889
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    834

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sprinkles View Post
    It's a response to a position that doesn't actually exist, and is almost reverse psychologically passive aggressive.

    Saying that "not all men rape women" is meant to be a counterpoint to the position that "all men rape women" which means it is implying that there is a consensus somewhere that all men rape women, and this isn't really the case. Or at least such an idea should not be taken seriously from the very few who would propose such a thing.
    I think you are right regarding most women and even most feminists, but keep in mind, "the very few who would propose such a thing" happen to be really well published people:

    THE NEW MYTHOLOGY OF RAPE: POLITICIZING WOMEN'S PAIN by Wendy McElroy

    [...]

    The opening paragraph of the New York Radical Feminists Manifesto reads:

    "It is no accident that the New York Radical Feminists, through the technique of consciousness-raising, discovered that rape is not a personal misfortune but an experience shared by all women in one form or another. When more than two people have suffered the same oppression the problem is no longer personal but political -- and rape is a political matter."

    The manifesto continues:

    "...man is always uneasy and threatened by the possibility that woman will one day claim her full right to human existence, so he has found ways to enslave her. He has married her, and through the family, binds her to him as wife and mother to his children. He has kept her helpless and dependent, forcing her to work when he needed her labor, isolating her (physically and psychologically), and as a final proof of his power and her debasement as a possession, a thing, a chunk of meat, he has raped her. The act of rape is the logical expression of the essential relationship now existing between men and women." (as quoted in Rape: The First Sourcebook for Feminists. Report from the Work- shop on Self-Defense by Mary Ann Manhart.p. 215)

    [...]
    In her near-legendary essay, Rape: The All-American Crime radical feminist Susan Griffin makes what no longer sounds like such a radical claim:

    "Indeed, the existence of rape in any form is beneficial to the ruling class of white males. For rape is a kind of terrorism which severely limits the freedom of women and makes women dependent on men...This oppressive attitude towards women finds its institutionalization in the traditional family." p.3 RAPE VICTIMOLOGY, ed. by Leroy G. Schultz, Charles C. Thomas, Springfield, Ill., 1975

    There was a pivotal point in feminism's shift on the issue of rape. In 1975, the book Against Our Will by Susan Brownmiller appeared. In its pages, Brownmiller charts the history of rape from Neanderthal times through to modern man, placing great emphasis on periods of war and crisis. Against Our Will is a watershed book, which was said to 'give rape its history.' It also presented new theory. Brownmiller maintains that rape is the primary mechanism through which men, in general, perpetuate their dominance over women in general. She claims that all men benefit from the fact that some men rape.

    [...]

    Brownmiller's second myth is that men, in general, have created a mass psychology of rape. Brownmiller claims that all men are rapists at heart and all women their natural prey:

    "Man's discovery that his genitalia could serve as a weapon to generate fear must rank as one of the most important discoveries of prehistoric times, along with the use of fire and the first crude stone axe. From prehistoric times to the present, I believe, rape has played a critical function...it is nothing more or less than a conscious process of intimidation by which all men keep all women in a state of fear." p. 14. [Emphasis in the original]

    [...]

    We need a theory that explores the complexity of the issue, rather than one that oversimplifies it to fit into a political agenda.

    Instead, radical feminists offer book after book of anecdotal studies that merge ideology with empirical questions. These studies make blanket and unproven assertions that have acquired the status of truth through sheer repetition.

    For example, in their essay, The Psychology of the Rapist and His Victim Lilia Melani and Linda Fodaski virtually equate heterosexual sex with rape:

    "Once we accept the relationship of aggression and submission; once we recognize force or struggle as an integral component of the sexual courtship (as in the battle of the sexes) it follows that the sex act itself is only a less emphatic expression of all those elements that make up criminal rape." Page 88. Rape: the First Sourcebook for Feminists.
    Likes SpankyMcFly, Robopop liked this post

  10. #890

    Default

    @Jarlaxle

    That sort of thing is why I made a caveat in the first place. Even though I seriously shouldn't have to caution that in a perfect world...

    Edit:
    And frankly I'm not surprised, as I've seen worse than that.

Quick Reply Quick Reply

  • :bye:
  • :hi:
  • :)
  • :hug:
  • :happy2:
  • :smile:
  • :wubbie:
  • :D
  • :wink:
  • ;)
  • :newwink:
  • :(
  • :cry:
  • :mad:
  • :dry:
  • :doh:
  • :huh:
  • :shock:
  • :shrug:
  • :blush:

Similar Threads

  1. A new INFJ *waves!*
    By moonlit_reveries in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 05-30-2008, 01:14 AM
  2. Feminism
    By GZA in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 131
    Last Post: 02-29-2008, 07:31 PM
  3. The Ocean Waves: a NF introduction
    By music_educe in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 11-16-2007, 08:00 PM
  4. *waving*
    By Sandy in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 10-22-2007, 08:29 PM
  5. Hello :D *waves*
    By Indranizia in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 05-12-2007, 04:40 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO