Keeping My Promise to Publish Feminist Viewpoints on Controversy over Alleged Campus Rape Crisis (Part I)
March 5th, 2008 by Glenn Sacks, MA for Fathers & FamiliesBackground: I discussed the recent controversy over the feminist "1 in 4 college women are raped" myth in my recent blog post 'It’s a lonely job, working the phones at a college rape crisis center...you wait for the casualties to show up but no one calls'. I noted that "the ladies at www.Feministing.com have responded with boiling rage and obscenities, without attempting to factually critique Mac Donald's research and arguments. The Feministing blog post is LA Times: What rape crisis?.
I also discussed the issue in my blog posts 'I was on the board of the women's resource center. I didn't agree with the annual 'Take Back the Night' program proclaiming the victimhood of women' and Feminist Is Outraged That Men Like Sexy, Scantily-Clad Women.
"Heather Mac Donald's recent column What campus rape crisis? Promiscuity and hype have created a phony epidemic at colleges (2/24/08) debunks the commonly propagated myth that one out of every four or five college women will be victims of rape or attempted rape. I don't agree with everything she says about modern college sex culture or the rape research, but her central premise--that a fake rape crisis has been whipped up against hapless, ever-vilified college boys--is correct...
"I make the following offer--if anybody at www.feministing.com or any other feminist has written or would like to write a critique of Mac Donald's article, I will publish it here. If anyone would like to take me up on this, please contact me at glenn@glennsacks.com."
A feminist activist named Rachel decided to take me up on my offer, sending me the letter below:
"I just wanted to point out that there is already at least one published well-written, well-argued response to Heather MacDonald's atrocious Los Angeles Times article, and it can be found here. There is also a thorough response at the blog The Curvature, located here. If you would keep your end of the deal and publish these responses that would be fantastic."
The two articles Rachel refers to are:
Wrong on rape by Nora Niedzielski-Eichner (Los Angeles Times, 2/27/08)
LA Times: Women Should Stop Bitching About the Rape that Doesn’t Actually Happen by Cara Kulwicki of the feminist blog The Curvature.
I would prefer to put both articles directly on my page in their entirety, as opposed to links, if the authors give me permission. If either one would, I can be reached at glenn@glennsacks.com. If any feminist readers have other articles on the controversy they think worthy, feel free to send me the links.
"));
19 queries. 0.541 seconds.
March 5th, 2008 at 11:02 am
Wonderful! Clicked on the Curvature link above for the second time and discovered:
"You Are Banned. Practice Your Misogyny, Racism and/or Homophobia Elsewhere."
Wow! I had posted no comments - it seems simply linking from Glenn's site is enough. There is clearly a dangerous trend to only read what you already believe and censor other views - not only deleting contrary comments but now even blocking access to your opinions. Thanks, Glenn, for taking the time to consider both sides.
From what I remember about the second post, it was high on invective and bile, and low on evidence. The other article had a link to DOJ statistics - a report which found that 350 out of 10,000 women on a campus might suffer a rape - about 3.5% - which seems very different from the 1 in 4 statistic usually bandied about.
March 5th, 2008 at 11:13 am
Steve- Well those Dept. of Justice statistics can't be correct. That doesn't fit our agenda and the ability to make accusations without proof. How are the feminists supposed to get unlimited power with correct statistics?
Steve-Good post and thanks for the stats.
March 5th, 2008 at 11:19 am
Is it me or do feminists with their agenda seem to always make personal attacks and have to resort to hysterical languge and insults to be noticed???
March 5th, 2008 at 11:23 am
Well, I went looking for a debate from one of those two articles, and found absolutely NOTHING to dispute the original claims made by the "offending" post. I did, however, find a lot of shaming language, and outrage, and a lot of "how DARE she" invective. Even the few verifiable facts linked to in the articles actually undermined their argument, not support it. Strange debate style, I must say.....
The feminist stranglehold on debate is ending, and they have no "ammo" save shaming tactics and fear mongering. The mark of a truly bankrupt ideology....
March 5th, 2008 at 11:24 am
I'll try and read through the suggested posts later. The one thing that does bother me however is how the person that sent these things seemed to view the situation. I draw attention to the following:
Glenn Says: "I make the following offer..."
Rachel then Says in response: "If you would keep your end of the deal..."
It is almost as if this person is suggesting that there is a significant chance that Glenn wouldn't keep his word. Furthermore, the notion of a deal makes it seem as if she feels this is "owed" to her, something which fails to recognize the generosity of the offer.
If I offer to let my friend borrow some money if they ask me for it... they would be quite rude to ask and then say "if you'd keep up your end of the deal that would be great". A more appropriate response would be for them to ask and then thank me for extending the offer in the first place.
March 5th, 2008 at 11:27 am
From Curvature: ""You Are Banned. Practice Your Misogyny, Racism and/or Homophobia Elsewhere.""
HAHAHA...sad really...their position is so weak they need to BAN simple click-throughs.
It's funny that feminists maintain that they love men (while at the same time taking every opportunity to attack men) and they say that non-feminists are unfair or don't understand the feminists' position by saying that they hate men.
Here's a hint: I love women and want them to be treated as TRUE equals (with equal rights AND equal responsibilities). Saying that I am a misogynist shows your complete and utter lack of understanding for my position. I guess two wrongs make a right in their mind!
Incidentally, you can get around the "ban" by simply copy/pasting the full URL into your browser. Then it doesn't catch the click-through.
March 5th, 2008 at 11:28 am
Steve/David, we had discussed these "stats" a few days ago. Here are a couple comments you may find interesting:
http://glennsacks.com/blog/?p=1869#comment-167458
http://glennsacks.com/blog/?p=1869#comment-167460
March 5th, 2008 at 11:33 am
ROLFAO - It's true, you are banned when you try and visit the site a second time. How sad is that?
March 5th, 2008 at 11:33 am
What jumps out at me in Nora Niedzielski-Eichner's article in the Los Angeles times is what I get from almost all feminist writers. She can write about women as victims but simply cannot acknowlege that many women use that victim status to their advantage when it suits them. She has a willful blindness or scatoma. What she gives us are examples of many women who have been raped. I believe her. What she does not acknowledge is that there are many women who falsely accuse men of rape. In her writing it is as if the two things are mutually exclusive. They are not and shame on her for trying to confuse the two.
I have been in the position of having been accused by an ex-spouse of being "abusive" to her and my daughter in order for her to try and gain sole custody. Thy dynamic is very similar. There are many women who don't like what my ex-wife did but very few women, let alone men, who will ever confront this. It is simply easier to shout rape or 911 than it is to confront a fellow sister.
Unfortunately, thanks to the internet, public incidents such as the Duke Lacrosse scandal, and people like Glenn Sacks, this is all starting to come out ot the closet. I would think that it would be in the interest of all women, including feminists, to acknowledge this phenomenom and try to get out front if for no reason more than that is is damaging to women who have truly been raped or abused.
March 5th, 2008 at 11:39 am
John Boy - if these people truly cared about victims then, yes, they would prosecute false claims. Unfortunately, for many movement leaders, ideology is a mask for a money/power/resources grab - and the last thing you want to do in that case is criticize your own constituency or minimize the size of "your problem".
March 5th, 2008 at 11:40 am
Dan M, you are right about the LA Times article. It was simply the same old "I can't believe the heretic attacked our orthodoxy" argument. She spent more time attacking Mac Donald's "conservative credentials" then refuting anything she said using any evidence. Now I will be the first one to admit that Mac Donald spent far too much time attacking free love and the like, but come on: at a base level, she used evidence (or pointed out lack thereof) to refute crazy claims by people that obviously do not know what they are talking about. That was the point of her article through and through and if you are going to attack it, at least have the decency to understand the problem!
I haven't read the Curvature one yet (I will later) but I'm going to guess it is the same fundamentalist (er feminist) hand wringing....You know, modern feminists would be much more credible if they would simply stop using failed statistical models and instead focused on true gender equality...
March 5th, 2008 at 11:49 am
Dan M. Says …
---“The feminist stranglehold on debate is ending”
They never had a stranglehold on debate in my view; it’s just that the opposing side never showed up to argue.
They then used their political muscle to bring about “unlawful” favoritism in our courts. They simply “strong armed” the legislative and judicial system into capitulation.
People in the courts and legislature figured either of the following:
If you can’t beat them you may as well join them … or … I don’t like what’s happening, but I want to keep my job.
The end result was that they started “raping” fathers and taxpayers in the nauseating pretense of the “best interests of children”.
All this screaming about rape is really pathetic. The only ones being raped are the idiots who let them get so much power in the first place.
Guess who that is?
Kevin Merck
March 5th, 2008 at 11:51 am
it seems simply linking from Glenn's site is enough.
Yep, the site checks the Referrer tag and puts up that message if you are coming from Glen's site. If you copy the link and paste it in a new window and then go to the site you should have no problems.
Wonderful viewpoint, however... simply by visiting this site we are women haters, homophobes, and/or racists.
*does the jerk-off motion*
March 5th, 2008 at 11:52 am
I'd also like to address something else. All of this garbage about college being a cesspool for rape prompted me to do a bit of my own digging into the literature.
What you will generally note is that the research that is quoted by most people trying to uphold the "man = rapist", "woman = victim" viewpoint is over 10 years old.
In a recent report from 2006 entitled "Predictors of Sexual Coercion Against Men and Women: A multilevel, multinational study of University Students" the following results were presented:
"Almost 3% if men reported forced sex and 22% reported verbal coercion"
The comparable statistics for women presented in the same study are 2.3% and 25% respectively.
As a result the suggestion that rape and sexual coercion is something perpetrated by men upon women in college is catagorically false.
Now you may also ask what the investogator found the main predictors of sexual violence to be in this study... well one is a history of child sexual assault... and another is gender hostility.
That's right folks... the main predictor of whether or not someone will commit sexual assault is how hostile they are to the other gender.
This leaves one with an unsettling feeling when it comes to all the hate being promulgated by some of these websites... they are in fact generating the rape culture they say they are striving to stamp out.
March 5th, 2008 at 11:56 am
I am trying to think..............was it jack kammer (if men have all the power how come women the rules), David Thomas (Not guilty: the case in defense of men), or someone else who said that most people would rather be raped than have their children taken away. Also, herjury is theorized by some to be about as stressful as rape itself (with false rape estimates at about 50%). And yet, none of this was a point of concern for our feminists in question.
MXY
March 5th, 2008 at 11:58 am
Actually, going back to said site:
"Actually, it is highly common for a woman to have sex with a man after he has assaulted her."
Really? Honestly?
How often do adult men associate with friends who have assaulted them?
Now I understand feminist viewpoints.... women really are weak, helpless, immature, unthinking children in their worldview. They need to be protected from men who are light-years ahead of them by the virtue of being able to think and having control over their own actions.
I now fully understand the definition of Misogyny as "A man who hates women as much as women hate each other."
With friends like Feminists, do women really need enemies?
March 5th, 2008 at 11:59 am
First time commenter, but I just wanted to point out how startling is to see just how angry many of these feminist bloggers get when someone diasgrees with them. They wish to portray many men as violent and aggressive, yet their own behavior is more frightening than anything I've seen written by someone like Glenn, or the article by Heather Mac Donald.
I imagine that in an in person conversation they would be the people who would get loud and close to your face in an attempt to intimidate and shut down your own ability to converse. Fighting for a cause doesn't mean trying to actually fight.
Seriously, how many times did that curvature blog post use foul language and name calling?
March 5th, 2008 at 12:02 pm
I gotta admit, I'm getting a little tired of the blaming of men for not standing up, the shaming language of our own, if you will. The truth is, most of the guys I know are hard working people who have no idea what's going on. They work their days, eat supper, watch the game at the local sports bar with friends, then go home, go to sleep and back to work. They're not interested because they simply don't know. And if they do know and care about these issues, in the vast majority of cases these guys are afraid to speak up, because "no one else" feels that way.
I'll believe men are all apathetic jerk offs when there's a concerted national education campaign, and no one cares. When that happens, I'll take your stance Kevin. But really, can you blame men for not knowing the truth when they've been spoonfed lies for decades?
March 5th, 2008 at 12:02 pm
Most of this covered while I was typing.
The Curvature article is a considerably more angry version of the LA Times op ed previously discussed. Laced with profanity and a link to Heather MacDonald's resume which for some reason serves to increase her credibilty. Ms. Kulwicki's credentials are considerably lacking in comparison.
The Curvature piece cites a number of articles that are simply proof that sexual assault happens and most (all?) are not about sexual assaults on campuses.
If those are the best rebuttals on offer...
March 5th, 2008 at 12:09 pm
taidan: "First time commenter,"
Welcome to the fray!
taidan: "I just wanted to point out how startling is to see just how angry many of these feminist bloggers get when someone diasgrees with them."
Excellent point. Wendy McElroy at ifeminists.net has commented on this before. Unfortunately I can't find the link, but apparently when Wendy started to comment positively on Men's Rights issues she was threatened with violence from feminists who felt that her beliefs were out of line with fundamentalist feminism. I am a big proponent of Independent Feminism (Wendy's brand) in comparison to mainstream feminism because the more I read comments on the mainstream feminist blogosphere the more I see the parallels between the feminist fundamentalists and the religious fundamentalists. It is astounding!
March 5th, 2008 at 12:09 pm
Taidan,
You are right, many of those posters are very hostile and angry... which based upon the study I just read leads me to believe there is a high probability that they are involved in inflicting sexual assault or desire to sexually assault men.
The study is very clear... gender hostility and the propensity to perpetrate sexual assault are strongly correlated... it leaves me to wonder if the people making those hate filled rants are really perpetrators trying to throw up smoke screens to hide their own criminal behavior.
It's no different than the politicians who come out increadibly strongly against homosexuals and then end up soliciting sex in bathroom stalls... sometimes those who make the most noise or come out the strongest against a particular issue are doing so to preemptivly prevent anyone from calling their own character into question.
March 5th, 2008 at 12:12 pm
Dan, if you believe men are apathetic because they do not know their is even these discussions of mens rights going on???
And if we know about this discussion, and do not send lincs to Glenns site to our friends to introduce them,
than what can be said about us that keep others in the dark???
March 5th, 2008 at 12:15 pm
If you really do want to read TheCurvature, take the link and post it into IE or your browser. The "banning" seems to rely on the referrer field from glennsacks.com.
It's complete with the typical feminist "trigger" warning -- it seems that Cara, the author, believes that just reading Heather McDonald's column may trigger PTSD events in a woman that had been raped. I found her post pretty much the definition of TL;DR but perhaps you may not. I think the comments are more "interesting" including the one by "mythago" that suggests feminists write to LA Times advertisers to tell them to pull their ads.
Here's a much more interesting article to read at the Huffington Post Rebecca Walker: Feminist Infighting. Ms. Walker is Alice Walker's daughter -- she is African American and Jewish. The context of the column were the responses to an interview being performed by Jessica Valenti of Feministing to be written by Valenti for the Nation. I am not sure I understand the context of all of Ms. Walker's comments, but I think many of her comments would ring true over here.
March 5th, 2008 at 12:17 pm
I found this which seems to go along with her 'rebuttal.'
http://thecurvature.com/2008/02/27/a-response-to-macdonald-a-lack-of-apology/
"(A question for MRAs: why such strong desire to disprove rape statistics if your goal isn’t to portray rape survivors as liars, deny their experiences and just generally have the right to rape with impunity? Answer: that is the point, and they’ll even generally admit to the first part.)
Disprove? Perhaps we just seek to get at the actual truth?
http://thecurvature.com/2008/02/23/why-ask-men-to-stop-raping-when-women-can-barricade-themselves-in-their-homes/
"Men can stop rape. Most men aren’t rapists, but almost all rapists are men. And rapists are the only ones who can stop rape.
And only muggers can stop muggings.
March 5th, 2008 at 12:21 pm
Women author lies in memoir. White woman lied that she grew up in a poor, black family, but really raised in rich, white family, among other things.
Publisher recalled all copies of the book and cancelled her book tour.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7278779.stm
http://www.nytimes.com/ref/garden/first-chapter-love-and-consequences.html
March 5th, 2008 at 12:29 pm
Just got a question:
Basically, the feminist position is that the occurrance of a certain kind of felony (rape) is completely off the chart when compared with other felonies on college campuses. And, if I'm not mistaken, college campuses have felony rates which tend to be below that of the communities around them. And, apart from feminist-designed studies, this kind of gap between felony rates has been noted in no other places. Am I incorrect in saying that?
Is it too much to ask that a study about on-campus rape be designed and carried-out by people who won't be disappointed by finding good news?
March 5th, 2008 at 12:30 pm
Dan M Says…
---“I gotta admit, I'm getting a little tired of the blaming of men for not standing up, the shaming language of our own, if you will. The truth is, most of the guys I know are hard working people who have no idea what's going on. They work their days, eat supper, watch the game at the local sports bar with friends, then go home, go to sleep and back to work. They're not interested because they simply don't know. And if they do know and care about these issues, in the vast majority of cases these guys are afraid to speak up, because "no one else" feels that way.
I'll believe men are all apathetic jerk offs when there's a concerted national education campaign, and no one cares. When that happens, I'll take your stance Kevin. But really, can you blame men for not knowing the truth when they've been spoonfed lies for decades?”
Dan you make the strongest possible argument in support of my view. It’s not good enough to just show-up for work and then watch the game with a few beers.
I know where you’re coming from Dan; I was one of those guys you’re talking about. Being “afraid” to speak-up because of the misconception that no one else feels that way is what got us into this mess.
The simple fact of the matter is that these dutiful, innocent guys you’re talking about are 100% to blame for this … not some rabid feminist.
March 5th, 2008 at 12:37 pm
Normally I avoid Curvature like the plague because its pretty hypocritical and here is why yet again I didn't read that entire response:
You can see the sarcasm dripping off of the page at the thought that an acquaintance is more likely to rape you than the culturally imagined big scary black stranger with a gun.
But people that get to Curvature from certain sites are the racists...right.
From what I remember about the second post, it was high on invective and bile, and low on evidence. The other article had a link to DOJ statistics - a report which found that 350 out of 10,000 women on a campus might suffer a rape - about 3.5% - which seems very different from the 1 in 4 statistic usually bandied about.
And that is why you never hear feminists actually back up that 1 in 4 statistic. It's a lie. Its all about generating hsyteria (like MCA points here very often). 1 in 4 or 1 in 5 would translate to 20% to 25% but that does does not sound as personal or fear inducing as 1 in 4 or 1 in 5.
Those two responses are just feminist venom passed off as "intelligent".
March 5th, 2008 at 12:56 pm
If we ever hope to restore justice we are going to have to accept personal responsibility for this crisis and stop blaming fanatical, bigoted feminists for the problem.
March 5th, 2008 at 12:58 pm
If it weren't so pathetic, it would be amusing. What a bunch of whing harpies are these women?? And very offensive as well. It seems as though they can't get their point across without using obcenities against whomever it is that they're disagreeing with. I can almost picture the writer stamping up and down, fists clenched, spewing..."It's not fair!!" My daughter does that also, but she's only two. I guess that's the mentality that we're dealing with here. Being a female, I find it EXTREMELY embarrassing to my gender to know that there are so many other women out there that share this same mentality of entitlement to anything and everything that the feminists all seem to have. Sometimes it makes me downright ashamed to be a women.
March 5th, 2008 at 1:05 pm
Steve Says:
March 5th, 2008 at 11:02 am
Wonderful! Clicked on the Curvature link above for the second time and discovered:
"You Are Banned. Practice Your Misogyny, Racism and/or Homophobia Elsewhere."
= = =
A way to get around this for Glenns readers is to right click on Glenns link go to properties copy the the address and use the http address directly
b
March 5th, 2008 at 1:09 pm
You can't really open up most men or women's eyes now a days. The dogma of extreme femanists is so ingraned in their heads they just look at you like you are a sexist ass. It doesn't matter if you believe in equality or that you yourself were raised by a single mom and so on. Your a bigot, period. So that just shuts you up and you keep it to yourself.
This same arguement closer is used in many subjects. You can't voice opinion about sexual prefference (be it good or bad), or dare question Isreal dropping bombs on people either. I hear folks on the radio get shut down all the time.
Homophobe and Nazi and that shuts them right up.
Same with anyone who questions the Language Act in Canada. People bring up that fact that it's supposed to protect people from being descriminated based on launguage, but has turned into a way to discriminate and they call them anti french or racists (against Minority), but those same Minority's push for anti minority laws in their province to stop people from speaking other languages haha.
March 5th, 2008 at 1:13 pm
My first thought about the LA Times piece is that Niedzielski-Eichner has either not read the MacDonald piece she's "responding" to, or like Otto in A Fish Called Wanda, doesn't understand it. She characterises it as "victim-blaming", but while MacDonald did criticise some female behaviour, that was far from the main thrust of the piece, which was that campus rape does not happen anywhere near as often as some would have you believe. Niedzielski-Eichner does not address that, except to say "sexual assault is a problem no matter what numbers you use - did MacDonald really mean to imply that rape isn't a problem if it is only impacting one woman or two women or 10 women a month per campus?" - which is a cowardly cop-out. Either the numbers you are claiming are accurate, in which case there is a "rape crisis" on college campuses, or they are not and the "rape crisis" is irresponsible scaremongering. But interesting that it seems the only response feminists are capable in response to any argument on the subject of rape, even when all it's saying is "women are not raped as often as you say they are", is "you're saying women deserve to be raped!"
The Curvature piece contains nothing to respond to. It's just a series of "how dare she"s.
March 5th, 2008 at 1:15 pm
Steve,
I had no problems whatsoever with opening pages or tabbed pages on curvature.com. My guess is that another kind of filtering is active, not linked to glennsacks.com
March 5th, 2008 at 1:17 pm
Again 1/2 in 1,000 people over 12 are raped this includes attemped, actual, and the threat of . . . this includes men and women according to the USDOJ I posted this elsewhere on Glenns blogs
b
March 5th, 2008 at 1:18 pm
A few points to make:
1) I am able to click through from Glenn site multiple times. Could be a glitch for others.
2) I am disturbed by the argument seen in both articles: the both authors support the idea that the survey knows better than the women it surveyed that they were raped. I think it was the Feministing post that said women often have consensual sex with the men who raped them previously. This is astounding. Maybe I can see a small fraction of the population of women that have been raped taking such an absurd action; but I doubt this population makes up any significant portion of the population of women that have been raped; definitely not 43%. This kind of thinking denotes a certain ‘stupidness’ on the part of women. A woman doesn’t know she was raped, or if she did know she was raped, it is easier for her to pretend it didn’t happen and continue to have sex with the guy who raped her; than to stand up for herself the smallest amount by throwing the guy out of her life. I personally have a higher opinion of women than that.
3) I hate the questions asked in the Koss study that made the 25% number a recognized stat. Take “Have you had sexual intercourse when you didn’t want to because a man gave you alcohol or drugs?” for example. It is a bad question on two fronts: a) what does “didn’t want to” and where does it fall with respect to the definition of rape, and b) it implies that women do not understand why a guy will buy her multiple drinks at a bar and that she is helpless to say no to said drinks. On the first point the phrase “didn’t want to” is ambiguous: does it mean she was incapacitated and couldn’t say no, that her inhibitions were lowered so she did something she wanted to on a base level but offended her sense of morality, perhaps she had sex with a guy she thought was ugly but she just wanted to be nice, any one can add examples that go on and on. How many of these examples rise to the point where a reasonable man would know that there wasn’t consent? On the second point I have to say this, when you, I, whoever is at a bar, and someone starts to buy us/them drinks, it is for a reason. It is to make us/them more pliable. It happens in business situations, romantic situations, hook up situations, breaking bad news situations, etc. This happens; the idea that a woman isn’t bright enough to realize this and say no to the drinks is preposterous. There are quite a few more questions in the Koss study that a tragically flawed like this one – and its not a mistake. Ask anyone that does surveys and/or market research and they will tell you that you can get any result you want based on how you phrase the questions you ask. (If this isn’t true, why is push-polling a dirty trick in politics?)
Thanks,
BigB
March 5th, 2008 at 1:21 pm
Lewis Says:
March 5th, 2008 at 12:17 pm
And only muggers can stop muggings.
= = =
And only women who lie can stop lying.
b
March 5th, 2008 at 1:29 pm
This is a bit off topic, but the rant on the Curvature link reminded me of it: Feminst BINGO. Have you seen the commercial for IBM where BINGO cards are handed out before a large group meeting and as the manager spouts buzzwords (out-of-the-box, disruptive, market driven, web 3.0, . . .) a woman in the audience shouts “BINGO!”. I thought Feminist BINGO might be fun- have a random card generator with words feminists predictably and reliably spout in their blogs (misogynist, patriarch, wife-beater, rape, A$$#0LE, control, denial, F~(%, $!~T and of course B!T( #). Download a card at the beginning of a thread, and the person who gets BINGO first posts that in the thread. Just for fun.
My point is that these women are so predictable. Profanity, pathetic attempts at shaming, and logic that one simply cannot argue with. I hope the other women can see how the expansive characterization of rape these women promote, along with their reflexive defense of false accusers, could damage the protection and justice for true rape victims, particularly women, as opposed to those merely seeking absolution from their own poor decisions. “To compensate for feelings of guilt or shame” was tied (with “spite or revenge”) as the most common motivation given by women who acknowledged they had made false accusations of rape (Charles P. McDowell, Ph.D, M.P.A., M.L.S., The False Rape Allegation in the Military Community, March 1983). Sorry, but hindsight remorse on her part does not make him a rapist. Read the comments on the Curvature thread, and see if some of the respondents sound like they might be compensating for feelings of guilt or shame.
As Catharine MacKinnon once said “if sex is normally something men do to women, viewing “yes” as a sign of consent is misguided.” By that standard, it is unclear under which circumstances sex could not be considered rape, particularly when the circumstances are viewed subjectively in hindsight by the woman. My advice- don’t take these women too seriously. They are self-marginalizing. Their hysteria speaks for itself.
Rachel- now that Glenn has posted the opposing views on his site, but opposing views are clearly not tolerated on the other site, and in light of the profanity and name-calling going on over there, I would welcome any comments, thoughts or observations you might want to share.
March 5th, 2008 at 1:45 pm
Bernie Misiura Says:
March 5th, 2008 at 1:21 pm
"And only women who lie can stop lying."
Good one!!!
Serenity Now Says:
March 5th, 2008 at 1:29 pm
Rachel- now that Glenn has posted the opposing views on his site, but opposing views are clearly not tolerated on the other site, and in light of the profanity and name-calling going on over there, I would welcome any comments, thoughts or observations you might want to share.
Seconded.
March 5th, 2008 at 2:12 pm
Shaming and "the silent treatment" (in this case, banning you from their blog) are standard American female tactics; in fact so ingrained and second nature that they are simply unaware what lame defenses they are.
Countless women have used shaming language on me; they absorb it from childhood on and since they are very rule-base, use it with a great sense of personal accomplishment and satisfaction. My lack of reaction infuriates them.
In corporations I have had females pull the silent tactic as if that automatically elevates them to victor status. No male dares treat me like this unless he wants his face punched because it is pussified behavior.
I don't talk to American women unless I have to. Very often they will start probing me with nosy questions until they get an answer they don't like, then will pull the shaming and silent tactics to punish me for being an independent free-thinking male.
March 5th, 2008 at 2:12 pm
Wrong on rape is pretty poor. It offers no statistical evidence whatsoever, only hearsay. It also takes the ridiculous position that men don't really know what rape is. And that they need to be 'reeducated' on the matter.
Although it is a damn good article compared to the curvature one. It says that women have sex with their rapists because of denial. 43% of raped college women have sex with their RAPIST because they are in denial? Sure!
It also says that girls don't report rapes because of the author of the original article, or people like her. So a woman thinks, 'well, I was just savagely raped, but I won't report it because someone wrote in a newspaper that there is no college rape crisis'
I really don't think that has anything to do with it. A woman knows if she's been raped.
Luckily, I wasn't banned. Although I guess this just proves that gem of a quote: a misogynist is someone who wins an argument with a feminist.
March 5th, 2008 at 2:16 pm
I can't read the articles.
Not because I can't click thru', the link works fine. But because I experience them as triggers for a whole pile of distressing emotions associated with battling the same kinds of blind prejudice for many years at the family courts. I have similar problems with many other feminist sites, up to and including physical responses - my hands shake, I sometimes feel like I want to cry, I withdraw. I read many of these sites while trying to figure out what was going on. Eventually I stopped because the stress outweighed the benefit I got from trying to understand the opposition. It became impossible to maintain an objective view while I had my fatherhood stripped from me by a liar and an abuser with the aid of people who claimed to be out to protect victims. So I stopped reading them.
Nevertheless, I read enough of the Curvature article to see that the author included a "trigger warning" for rape victims with regard to the original "rape crisis" article under discussion. The irony is palpable, is it not?
(I only ever got banned once, from Trish Wilson's site, when she thought I was posting under two names, which I was not. Even I thought the other poster was unpleasant.)
MXY: "I am trying to think..............was it jack kammer (if men have all the power how come women the rules), David Thomas (Not guilty: the case in defense of men), or someone else who said that most people would rather be raped than have their children taken away."
Many times during my darkest hours I thought to myself "I'd rather be raped than go through this". This is the first time I've actually said it in "public" (quotes because you don't know who I am), but it's not something I'll say elsewhere (especially where I am identified) because I do not want to be ridiculed or taken to be melodramatic. Nevertheless, I do find it interesting that the psychological consequences of what I am continuing to go through are apparently so akin to "the worst thing you can do to a woman".
March 5th, 2008 at 2:17 pm
Kevin:
I know that we agree on many things, but where we seem to part ways is my belief that there has been a long, concerted effort to dehumanize men. This may have only been nebulous in the early days of feminism, but it's hard to argue that's it's not in full swing now. I know you disagree that feminists are at fault here, and there is some validity to the argument of "follow the money", as well as others. My contention is that feminism as a movement has utilized each "ally" precisely like a country would utilize an ally. Allies do not exist to overlap each other's strengths, otherwise why ally? But if one hand washes the other, well now you're talking. Coincidentally, it's this same thought process that is behind conspiracy charges....
Feminism is currently, and really has been from it's inception, a propaganda distribution tool. That's it...a great big nozzle from which the bulls#!t could fly. And it's been remarkably effective, to the point that feminist advocates are taken on their face to be "equality" experts. They have owned the public discourse, for whatever reason, for the last half century, and this cannot continue.
In one manner of speaking the take I often see you espouse DOES make sense, feminism isn't a thing that can be defined, much like pornography cannot. However, if one takes the injustices at hand, and traces them back to their origins, one finds nearly universally a loud feminist demand for that exact thing. Not having the actual power in their hands exonerates them about as much as Don Corleone, because he wasn't actually "there" for the hits he ordered. Plausible deniability is pretty easy to see through when you don't need to adhere to legally defined standards of evidence.
As to the culpability of the average man, I think you give men less credit than they deserve - not that that's going around or anything. Zealotry is not an innocent mistake on the part of feminists. At best, they can be described as being used as "mouthpieces" for a Marxist ideology, at worst the architects of the attempted downfall of society. I suppose, like you, I suspect the truth is closer to the extreme than not. I just differ as to which end.
March 5th, 2008 at 2:18 pm
(Serenity Now) -- "As Catharine MacKinnon once said “if sex is normally something men do to women, viewing “yes” as a sign of consent is misguided.” By that standard, it is unclear under which circumstances sex could not be considered rape, particularly when the circumstances are viewed subjectively in hindsight by the woman. My advice- don’t take these women too seriously. They are self-marginalizing. Their hysteria speaks for itself."
Srenity there is nothing "serene" about your voice and that is fantastic!
Your gender is indeterminant, but your incisive logic is indisputable!
Glenn, another keeper!
You have a best selling book right on your computer screen....
Every day your site attracts more and more writers who are way above average... way above.
And you are home playing Mr. Mom?
You have a perfect life.
I trust you understand that.
March 5th, 2008 at 2:26 pm
MXY, I don't think Kammer made that argument, and I have not read the other book.
I definitely know that Angry Harry has made that argument.
March 5th, 2008 at 2:27 pm
I tend to be wary of his extremism though.
March 5th, 2008 at 2:31 pm
Lewis Says:
March 5th, 2008 at 1:45 pm
Bernie Misiura Says:
March 5th, 2008 at 1:21 pm
"And only women who lie can stop lying."
Good one!!!
Thanks! You too
Serenity Now Says:
March 5th, 2008 at 1:29 pm
Rachel- now that Glenn has posted the opposing views on his site, but opposing views are clearly not tolerated on the other site, and in light of the profanity and name-calling going on over there, I would welcome any comments, thoughts or observations you might want to share.
Seconded.
On the question? All in favor? AYE!
b
March 5th, 2008 at 2:31 pm
The thought occurred to me that I would love to see someone who is not allied with either feminism or the right wing -- a completely dispassionate, a-political, objective third party, examine the so-called campus rape crisis.
Then it occurred to me: it would be difficult to get someone of that ilk to seriously analyze the issue -- because it's not on anybody's radar, except the radical feminists. I am perfectly serious, and I'm not saying that to be flippant. The students don't care about it. The parents don't think it's a problem. The police don't think it's a problem. In fact, the entire thrust of the radical feminist rape movement is to convince young women that they've been raped -- because they don't even realize it.
As I pointed out the other day, in 2006 on the entire campus of the Univ. of Pittsburgh, a big urban campus with about 18,000 women enrolled, do you know how many reports of sexual assault were made to campus police? One.
This seems to be, in all seriousness, a manufactured issue. I am glad there are so few rapes, and I hope we keep educating young people about what consent means. It just gets tireseome hearing the radicals paint our gender as intrinsically evil all the time.
March 5th, 2008 at 2:41 pm
This is what I put on the Curvature blog.
"This blog entry is long on “shaming” language and short on real statistics.
Some of the statistics you link to are based on studies where the definition of rape, coercion, and force are broadly interpreted.
I also find it difficult to believe that a woman would continue to date her rapist. I’ve always believed that women are capable of making better decisions than that. And shouldn’t we all expect the best from women? Anything else is lowering the bar.
I also know that some women do expect a man to “overcome” her inhibitions placed on her by a traditional patriarchal morality. In fact, I myself had a girlfriend who confided in me that her fantasy was to be raped. I found the whole thing repugnant. Our relationship did not last.
You seem to place the burden of responsibility on men. You say men give women alcohol and men don’t initiate communication. Well women don’t have to drink that beer and why can’t women take a little more initiative themselves? After all if she’s just lying there not participating then she clearly is not distracted enough to say, “I don’t want to have sex with you.” And frankly, shouldn’t she have made such a decision long before she ended up in his bedroom?
Something else that bothers me is that you completely ignore the culture of false accusations. These are not rare. Some have been widely reported in the media, but the vast majority have gone unreported. Being falsely accused of rape is like being raped every day and being powerless to stop it. If women are so opposed to rape why would they visit the same emotional horrors on innocent men? And doesn’t the existence of so many false accusations actually work against other women being believed? If your purpose is to prevent rape and gain justice for women you would think that fighting against false accusations would serve that end?
You also claim that article’s like MacDonald’s work to undermine a response to the rape crisis. I find it difficult to believe that the rare articles debunking the feminist position and statistics on rape could overpower the feminist voices. I’ve rarely heard of anyone willing to challenge the feminist position on rape let alone any other position. This is especially so with the kind of shaming language employed in this blog. And given the millions of dollars in matching federal funds given to women’s groups, rape crisis centers, and college anti-rape programs it is obvious that women’s voices are being heard loud and clear. Besides, don’t we want opposing views? If the feminist position on rape is so clear and powerful then any opposing position should fail easily.
Finally, when discussing rape let’s all admit to one thing. When women talk about rape they really only care about rape that happens to women. Two-thirds of all rape victims are men. That is a misleading statement of course because men are raped repeatedly and by multiple assailants in prison until they are released. These men rarely get much attention by so-called rape activists. And there are no rape crisis centers for men."
My comment is awaiting moderation.
March 5th, 2008 at 2:52 pm
As for the "Wrong on Rape" article. . .
Another feminist hate screed. "Rape is real. Rape is everywhere. And anyone who says otherwise is a misogynist baby killing jerkwad"
This article is long on shaming language and short on real statistics. It amazes me that women can throw hysterical fits and hurl hateful insults one minute and then complain that they aren't taken seriously the next.
There is no rape crisis. Feminists have admitted that they use rape as a political weapon. Given the millions of federal dollars given to women's groups it is clear that it's working.
100% of date rape can be stopped if only women make better decisions. Don't drink, don't go back to a guys place unless she wants sex. But in women's minds it's men who bear the responsibility for women's health and safety.
As long as only men are responsible for women's health and safety then only men will fail.
And the sad irony is men who decide they no longer want that responsibility are called misogynists and deadbeats.
March 5th, 2008 at 3:01 pm
Well I was banned from the Curvature for my post. That's pretty freakin' funny.
March 5th, 2008 at 3:08 pm
I am gratified to see that feminists are now calling women who have the temerity to disagree with them "misogynist assh*les." And that this type of reasoned rebuttal is the best they have to offer.
Looks like we're making progress, boys and girls!
March 5th, 2008 at 3:10 pm
you are home playing Mr. Mom
Firstly I get the impression that Glenn is perpetually really busy writing blog entries, reading newspapers and collaborating on articles. I sometimes wonder how he has the time for it all.
"playing Mr. Mom"? This is exactly the kind of assumption that Glenn is writing against. This innate assumption is what gets fathers laughed out of family courts, and discriminated against as parents and caregivers. He is being a father. I mean seriously. WTF.
March 5th, 2008 at 3:10 pm
Dan M Says …
Kevin:
“I know that we agree on many things, but where we seem to part ways is my belief that there has been a long, concerted effort to dehumanize men.”
That’s not at all the way I see it Dan. I understand the “very long” concerted effort to dehumanize men. What I don’t understand is the lack of responsibility on the part of men, (and responsible members of the community) (feminists not included) not taking responsibility for the current state of affairs. I will admit that it was unfair to credit 100% of the fault to men, but what’s more important in my mind is not necessarily the measure of guilt, as much as the apathetic attitude by society at large.
The rest of your statement, in my opinion, doesn’t really stay with the issue at hand. I don’t want to get into a debate about the history of feminism or conspiracy theories. I prefer to stay with the main issue of taking responsibility and bringing an end to the injustice.
Taking responsibility in my book means that you do whatever you can within the framework of the real law, (constitutional law) regardless of the personal sacrifices.
I’m not going to take a back seat to anyone Dan.
How about you?
Kevin Merck
March 5th, 2008 at 3:14 pm
I think the days where people (especially men) pay attention to female outrage and hysterics are coming to an end.
At least I hope so.
March 5th, 2008 at 3:19 pm
The only way date rape will ever end is if they pass a law that women must initiate everything.
The woman must:
1. ask the guy out on a date.
2. ask the guy to buy her a beer.
3. ask the guy to take her home.
4. ask the guy inside. (but not for coffee-but for sex)
5. ask the guy to take off his clothes.
6. ask the guy to penetrate her.
7. then ask the guy to stay the night or to leave.
8. then call the guy the next day.
See women could take total control of the situation but they always place responsibility on men. Guess what? Men fail. And as long as men have the responsibility then only men will fail.
March 5th, 2008 at 3:27 pm
Kevin M.
Usually I think you and I are generally on the same page, but "If we ever hope to restore justice we are going to have to accept personal responsibility for this crisis and stop blaming fanatical, bigoted feminists for the problem" is a concept that trips over itself.
How about, "If we ever hope to restore justice, men will have to accept that fanatical, bigoted feminists are causing injustice, and will then have to accept that they have a responsibility to root out and eliminate the cause of that injustice."
Telling men that they are responsible for defending themselves when they have been attacked is fine, but one can't simply ignore the attack that makes the advice necessary.
March 5th, 2008 at 3:42 pm
In response to Jay R Says …
I think you’re missing the point entirely. The only reason feminists have the power they do now is because we did nothing to stop them.
How is that their fault?
Who has the responsibility to induce change? Feminists refuse to accept responsibility for anything, so that leaves us.
We are the ones who allowed feminists to gain power and we are the only ones who can do anything to change it.
I don’t see how that “trips over itself”.
March 5th, 2008 at 3:48 pm
Jean Valjean, excellent stuff!
Roy, you like to be provocative, which I enjoy. But, "playing Mr. Mom" are fightin' words, bro! You may have noticed how many guys on this site would give their left nut to get the chance to "play Mr. Mom", i.e., get to be a dad for their kids. I'm sure you was jus' funnin', though. ;-)
March 5th, 2008 at 3:49 pm
Hey Superstep.
I really agree with you. I think it is so patronising to women the attitude that these feminists have. Like women are children who are not responsible for their actions and don't really know what they are doing. And their whole paradigm is like "women need special laws, special advantages to compete on an equal footing with men discrimination, special handouts from the government" (recent example: they think women should get special consideration in the US's new economic stimulus plan).
Bla bla bla.
"X hits women harder. Y hits women harder. Women are more likely to be affected by Z. Women have always been the primary victims of T..."
Do they think that women are weak? Do they think women could have evolved to be weak? Sounds like they are the ones who do not respect or value women's qualities. Women have been coping with social and evolutionary pressures for thousands of years, as have men.
And what's this men and women as competitors model anyway?
Sometimes it makes me downright ashamed to be a woman.
That's a real shame. Their ideology has had the same effect on a lot of men who believe it. It seems to me you should not be ashamed in the same way that I should not be ashamed that some other guy is murdering people.
I hope you stick around, I really love it when there are women posting here.
George
March 5th, 2008 at 3:57 pm
I agree with the critique that lack of evidence and shaming in Nora's piece does nothing to counter the original article. However one area, while not a conduit to rape, where I think she raises an important issue is the sexualization of society in general. I think we do need to be cognizant of these sort of images/trends and consider what messages they send to children and young adults. Again, I don't think this is a direct cause of rape, but I think belies a valid point that merits reflection. Just a thought.
March 5th, 2008 at 4:00 pm
The only way we can temper the current rape hysteria juggernaut is to start charging women who make false rape accussations!!
March 5th, 2008 at 4:13 pm
Kevin@ "The only reason feminists have the power they do now is because we did nothing to stop them. How is that their fault?"
Your statement is correct -- as far as it goes. As for your question, however, if they did nothing wrong, then there was nothing to be stopped, and there is no "fault", right? On the other hand, if what they have done is wrong, and therefore needs to be stopped, then even though men are irresponsible for not stopping them (yet), what they are doing is still wrong, and they are at fault for what they are doing, don't you agree? In other words, men's irresponsibility and tardiness in opposing feminist abuse does not excuse that abuse. This is what I meant with my "tripped over" comment. I hope you did not take offense.
To use a recent historical example, Hitler was wrong to invade Czechoslovakia and Poland unprovoked, even though P.M. Chamberlain of Britain was engaged in a policy of appeasement at the time. Things got sorted out later -- in fairly dramatic fashion. Perhaps it would be best to think of men as a group who has been "appeasing" evil for too long, and now that this hasn't worked, they must be exhorted to get up the gumption to fight for the justice being denied them. Does history take a dim view of Chamberlain? Yes, and history should take a dim view of men's general inaction in the face of serious threat. But, of course, hindsight is 20/20.
March 5th, 2008 at 4:29 pm
Read the articles. Stylish profanity? Check. Spittle flecked denouncements of any idea threatening the feminist worldview? Check. Ad hominem attacks against Heather MacDonald? Check. Evidence refuting her arguments....evidence refuting her arguments.... hmmmm. Seems there is something missing here.
March 5th, 2008 at 4:31 pm
BTW hulienowl, the sexualization of society has proceeded to the cheers and whistles of feminists. This is another case of "work hard to create the problem (on federal tax dollars) then decry the problem, then declare only you can solve it (if we give you enough federal tax dollars).
March 5th, 2008 at 5:10 pm
I'd lay money that the overwhelming majority of the radical feminists have borderline personality disorder. They're infinite levels of projection, viperous language, entitlement, irresponsibility, delusions, false claims... the whole gamut - reeks of BPD.
March 5th, 2008 at 5:22 pm
Wow, Mister-M, you just put the whole thing in perspective for me.
My ex is a BPD. Every feminist rant I've ever read sounds just like one of her rants, with the same faulty logic, inflated statistics, vague and contradictory definitions, and constant belittling.
It probably goes without saying, but she's got a well established history of false allegations. Nothing's ever been done to her, but she's in court now for a civil suit related to malicious prosecution.
March 5th, 2008 at 5:43 pm
In response to Jay R Says …
I think you’re still missing the point.
It’s our fault, but more important than finding fault is finding solutions.
Who is responsible for restoring justice? As I said, and I think we’re all in agreement, feminists don’t take responsibility for anything, and that leaves us to fix it.
I think you’re just playing mind games and this is not the place for games. There are people dying every day over this injustice and we’re the ones who have to take the responsibility to stop the bloodshed.
If you want to continue to blame feminists for your problems go right ahead. It doesn’t change the fact that men have to start taking more responsibility for our future than just showing up for work and having a few beers with the boys.
March 5th, 2008 at 5:58 pm
Here is a great quote from Curvature: "Saying “no” is more than enough. A woman does not even have to say “no” — she simply has to have never said that she wanted to engage in the sexual activity. Women are not holes for you to stick your xxxx into unless they manage to give you a black eye before you get the chance. They are people. Without thoughts and feelings and bodies that belong to them. "
Note I added the 'xxxx'. This is about a feminist's definition of rape. Heh, so now remember, this is from the people who brought you inter-marriage non-violent rape accusations.
So, can you imagine, your wife is thinking of divorce but like most, has told her lawyer but not you, and you think things are fine, you have sex one night in bed and think nothing of it. But, you forgot to ask......YOU RAPIST!
Well, yeah, ok, feminists are dumb, at least that one is.
March 5th, 2008 at 6:23 pm
I agree with the critique that lack of evidence and shaming in Nora's piece does nothing to counter the original article. However one area, while not a conduit to rape, where I think she raises an important issue is the sexualization of society in general. I think we do need to be cognizant of these sort of images/trends and consider what messages they send to children and young adults. Again, I don't think this is a direct cause of rape, but I think belies a valid point that merits reflection. Just a thought.
An excellent point and I'm glad you brought it up. However, let's be clear of what is going on. Women are self-sexualizing. It is women who wear sexy clothing and act in a sexual manner. Sexual power is one of the female powers and right now there is almost no limit to it.
From one feminist perspective they don't like to see the sexualization of women. They believe this is caused by a male dominated society and not by a lack of moral control of women's sexual values. Let's also be clear that it is feminists who have said women should not be forced to follow traditional patriarchal moral values. So we have what we have today.
Furthermore, as soon as anyone starts suggesting that women not dress like Britney or Madonna there will be cries of the male dominated society trying to control women and send them back into the kitchen. So it's a double standard in which both sides are blamed on men.
Let me also point out that it is the bombardment of sexual images that makes men addicted to female sexuality. And it is the re-enforcement of men as losers, who don't worship female sexuality, that keeps a lot of men from speaking out against the excesses of feminism.
March 5th, 2008 at 6:27 pm
"The only reason feminists have the power they do now is because we did nothing to stop them. How is that their fault?"
Feminists have claimed enslavement and oppression by men. Yet it was men's profound desire to protect women and care for them that gave the feminist movement so much power. Even today men's contribution and the motivation behind it is largely ignored and or denied by women.
March 5th, 2008 at 6:32 pm
Well, yeah, ok, feminists are dumb, at least that one is.
Which is why she censors opposing views. She can't take the heat.
March 5th, 2008 at 7:09 pm
In the article Wrong on Rape, she carefully avoids making reference to actual statistics (like the 1 in 4 claim). Instead, she just resorts to generalisations like saying 'rape is common' etc.
The problem is that the more that feminists expand the definition of rape, eventually they will succeed in creating enough guilty men.
I like the way she mocks Heather MacDonald for supposedly wanting to bring back a return to greater levels of chastity on the part of women. Regardless of what anyone thinks of that, or whether MacDonald really argues that, what is the alternative that feminists offer? They want to encourage more promiscuity, but then redefine more of that sex as rape. This is about as loopy and schizophrenic as you can get. But then, that is the only way they can continue to engineer a rape crisis and keep their funding.
March 5th, 2008 at 7:46 pm
War on Drugs, War on Poverty, Mothers against Drunk Driving, War on Terror, Rape Crisis.
See any common threads, here?
March 5th, 2008 at 7:50 pm
Excuse the legalese.
Stephen and Nick, you've both hit the nail on the head. The radical feminist definition of rape is a moving target, but the one definition they don't want to discuss is the legal definition. They toss the legal defnintions of rape and consent onto a scrapheap of willful indifference.
Rape, to the extent it has any meaning, is a legal term. For example, in most jurisdictions, merely because a woman is "legally" intoxicated for purposes of driving a car does not necessarily mean she can't validly consent to intercourse. A recent Mass. case reiterated that she had to be "wholly insensible." That's important.
And this is most important: the feminists don't seem to conprehend that the test is whether a person in the position of the man would reasonably understand that the woman has consented, based on her objective manifestations of assent -- as shown from the surrounding circumstances, her words, conduct and even her silence. Her secret, subjective desires and wishes are of no import. Rape is an intentional crime, and if the male reasonably believes there was consent, THEN THERE WAS CONSENT. (That's not MY rule, that's the law.)
Moreover, to the extent they base their rationales on surveys that only questioned women, they are fatally flawed. This, of course, suggests that when it comes to rape one gender is incapable of lying while the other is comprised of pathological liars.
March 5th, 2008 at 8:14 pm
She clearly hates men, and anyone who disagrees with her, no matter how civil their rebuttal, is villified as much as someone who actually committed the legal definition of the felony.
IMHO, she wants to give women the means to arbitrarily incarcerate any man at will.
March 5th, 2008 at 9:16 pm
Jean Valjean said "Feminists have claimed enslavement and oppression by men. Yet it was men's profound desire to protect women and care for them that gave the feminist movement so much power. Even today men's contribution and the motivation behind it is largely ignored and or denied by women."
As the old saying goes 'no good deed goes unpunished'. Men have been mercilessly punished simply for loving women too much. Because men care more about women than women care about men, this has been ruthlessly exploited to extract more advantages for women at the expense of men. Men have effectively been punished for our virtues. I for one have learned my lesson.
The problem is that women are not conditioned to offer the same consideration to men, which is why women are able to exploit these unfair advantages. The vast majority of men would not dare to subject women to the sort of injustice and dispossession increasingly meted out to men. But women are able to do so without, it would seem, any hint of guilt or remorse.
March 5th, 2008 at 9:45 pm
roy Says:
March 5th, 2008 at 2:18 pm
Srenity there is nothing "serene" about your voice and that is fantastic!
Your gender is indeterminant, but your incisive logic is indisputable!
Glenn, another keeper!
You have a best selling book right on your computer screen....
Every day your site attracts more and more writers who are way above average... way above.
And you are home playing Mr. Mom?
You have a perfect life.
I trust you understand that.
= = =
Roy,
What are you trying to get a date? You smooth talker you . . .
b (-;
March 5th, 2008 at 9:46 pm
Re: Jay R and Kevin Merck
Kevin, you accuse Jay R of playing mind games for simply pointing out a logical flaw in your argument. I guess in your world there is no such thing as logical argument, only mind games. Wow.
March 5th, 2008 at 9:50 pm
Jean Valjean Says:
March 5th, 2008 at 2:52 pm
This article is long on shaming language and short on real statistics. It amazes me that women can throw hysterical fits and hurl hateful insults one minute and then complain that they aren't taken seriously the next.
There is no rape crisis. Feminists have admitted that they use rape as a political weapon. Given the millions of federal dollars given to women's groups it is clear that it's working.
100% of date rape can be stopped if only women make better decisions. Don't drink, don't go back to a guys place unless she wants sex. But in women's minds it's men who bear the responsibility for women's health and safety.
= = =
Jean,
Careful the statments you made are the very statments that got me banned or did I? I do not know because my posts always go to moderation at Feministing.com
b
March 5th, 2008 at 9:51 pm
Every time a feminist says "Men can stop rape".
I am thinking -
"No! Only rapists can stop rape by not raping".
But its only then I realize they already think all men are rapists.
March 5th, 2008 at 9:58 pm
Jean Valjean Says:
March 5th, 2008 at 3:19 pm
The only way date rape will ever end is if they pass a law that women must initiate everything.
The woman must:
1. ask the guy out on a date.
2. ask the guy to buy her a beer.
3. ask the guy to take her home.
4. ask the guy inside. (but not for coffee-but for sex)
5. ask the guy to take off his clothes.
6. ask the guy to penetrate her.
7. then ask the guy to stay the night or to leave.
8. then call the guy the next day.
See women could take total control of the situation but they always place responsibility on men. Guess what? Men fail. And as long as men have the responsibility then only men will fail.
= = =
This is not so funny and many collages and Universities have this exact set of rules for MEN when on a date or on campus or in a girls dorm with a girl from the school. He and only he must ask for permission every step of the way or it is rape and punishable by the school under the disciplinary boards.
b
March 5th, 2008 at 9:59 pm
Nick S Says:
Re: Jay R and Kevin Merck
---“Kevin, you accuse Jay R of playing mind games for simply pointing out a logical flaw in your argument. I guess in your world there is no such thing as logical argument, only mind games. Wow.”
Maybe in your world he posed a logical argument. I see that as your problem, not mine.
March 5th, 2008 at 10:24 pm
Kevin,
the logic of Jay R's argument was simple. The fact that you see logical disagreement as "mind games" I view as your problem.
March 5th, 2008 at 10:55 pm
NIck said:
"As the old saying goes 'no good deed goes unpunished'. Men have been mercilessly punished simply for loving women too much. Because men care more about women than women care about men, this has been ruthlessly exploited to extract more advantages for women at the expense of men. Men have effectively been punished for our virtues. I for one have learned my lesson.
The problem is that women are not conditioned to offer the same consideration to men, which is why women are able to exploit these unfair advantages. The vast majority of men would not dare to subject women to the sort of injustice and dispossession increasingly meted out to men. But women are able to do so without, it would seem, any hint of guilt or remorse."
That is good stuff nick.
I envision a "new chivalry"........where people, male and female alike, treat each other with the same courtesy, kindness, virtue, and empathy that men have traditionally displayed to women before the abolition of old fashioned male-on-female chivalry.
MXY
March 5th, 2008 at 10:57 pm
Nick S Says:
March 5th, 2008 at 10:24 pm
Kevin,
---“the logic of Jay R's argument was simple.”
Here is where we disagree. You apparently see logic in his statements and I don’t. I have my opinion and you have yours. You think it’s my problem and I think it yours. Do you see where this is going?
Maybe you would like to enlighten me on what you think is so logical about his statement. I would appreciate it if you would include his whole comment in your response and show me line for line the wisdom of his statement as it pertains to the statement I made that he was responding to. Please also include my statement.
I look forward to a logical discussion.
Thanks
March 5th, 2008 at 11:15 pm
I think the LA times article is well written and makes several good points. The one I think is most valuable is that young people need to be guided as to what is acceptable sexual practice and what is unacceptable. It is really confusing.
As long as this guidance is coming from a feminist dogma (that's a big if), it would actually be helpful for men and women to know what is considered rape and what is not.
The problem I forsee is that those who decide to take over this role will likely be feminist and say "anything a female thinks is rape, is rape."
March 5th, 2008 at 11:17 pm
"If you want to continue to blame feminists for your problems go right ahead. It doesn’t change the fact that men have to start taking more responsibility for our future than just showing up for work and having a few beers with the boys."
Seriously Kevin, stop hating your gender so much, it doesn't become you. The fact is, all John Q Public has to do is publicly agree with MRA statements, and espouse their agreement. that's it. And that's a lot. You say this board and others like it do no good, yet it's read by hundreds of thousands of beady little eyes each month....how many street corners would you have to stand on in a month to get those eyes? F4J scales a bridge in London, the whole western world gets to see. Go on CNN once in a while, you have an audience of at least hundreds :)
People don't like to be exhorted into action. Show them why they should be mad without judging though, and men will come around fast. People like Marc are getting the message out. Even when Glenn is blatantly (nearly) shouted off the set by hosts and other guests, the message is still getting out - as are the tactics of our opponents.
But.....
We have the advantage, we know what worked, and what didn't, and we have a fairly good idea as to why in many cases. We have several credible allies/members with excellent books, and solid research. We have simple MATH on our side for chrissakes! All we need is the funding and the focus.
If I had more than subsistence level income, I'd have done a few things myself by now.
March 5th, 2008 at 11:27 pm
This is not so funny and many collages and Universities have this exact set of rules for MEN when on a date or on campus or in a girls dorm with a girl from the school. He and only he must ask for permission every step of the way or it is rape and punishable by the school under the disciplinary boards.
Actually I'm OK with this. Although I would like women to be the ones asking it works out for men that we have a set of rules to follow.
As long a guy follows these rules no one can screw him over later.
I remember when I was in college back in 1988 and they gave us all a big lecture about "no means no". While I initially didn't like the idea that a woman could lead me all the way to the bedroom and we're both naked and in bed and then say "no", I also knew that it protected me as much as it protected her.
Frankly, when I ask a woman if she wantso have sex and she says "yes"--it's a huge turn on.
And if we were both in a sexual situation where it seemed absolutely we were going to have sex and I asked her and she said "No". I told her to get the F out. Why? Because if she sent signals saying "yes" all night and led me right up to the bedroom and then said "no" that means she's freakin' nuts. I mean BPD nuts. She's got some screw loose that tells her she can mess with my head and tempt fate.
So all these "protocols" that they want college guys to follow ultimately benefit men more than the women because they expose all the nut jobs before they get their hooks into him.
March 5th, 2008 at 11:27 pm
@Nick:
It’s lights out for me.
@Jay R.
If you weren’t just playing games and were trying to make a legitimate point I apologize. I make mistakes, especially when I’m tired.
Good night John Boy.
March 5th, 2008 at 11:39 pm
"If you want to continue to blame feminists for your problems go right ahead. It doesn’t change the fact that men have to start taking more responsibility for our future than just showing up for work and having a few beers with the boys."
The problem is that taking "responsibility" for most men means serving and protecting women. Even now as the excesses of the women's movement become known some men leap forward to defend women and justify those excesses. These are the same chivalric patriarchal type males who supported the movement in the first place. All of them reacting with the motive of making themselves more valuable to women. It's all part of their biological imperative. These men are really the saddest members of our sex because they really have nothing more to offer than blind obedience. They are the most willing of slaves.
We need to change what it means to be a man. That being a man means not getting screwed over by a woman in divorce court. That "manning up" means not paying child support for a kid you never wanted by a woman you barely know. That being courageous means supporting other men when they face vindictive wives and girlfriends or men who are abused by their spouses. That being strong means not being a slave.
We need to change the perception of what it means to be a man and to be valuable as a man. Being disposable is not manly. Being submissive to a woman's criticism and incessant demands is not manly.
When we see men getting screwed over we need to call them what they are. Sissies, losers, mangina, whatever. I know that's might be hurtful but doing so will change men's perceptions of what it means to be a man. When we achieve that we gather many more allies.
March 6th, 2008 at 1:19 am
Allow me to play investigator, or perhaps "psychological speculator", here for a moment - hmm..let's see..which of the following two persons has motivation to lie:
1) A radical feminist who, to help reach her goal of spreading misadry by labeling all men as potential rapists, and desire to maintain the victim status of women so as to enable them to receive further special privileges, has these as motivations for perpetuating the myth of a "rape crisis" on campuses.
or,
2) A woman who works at a rape crisis center, who notices that she gets too few calls, lies and says "there's really no crisis" in order to close down the center. That way, her brother, who is an undiscovered serial rapist on campus, is less likely to get caught.
Let's seee..hmmm..
March 6th, 2008 at 1:22 am
Jean Valjean Says:
March 5th, 2008 at 11:27 pm
This is not so funny and many collages and Universities have this exact set of rules for MEN when on a date or on campus or in a girls dorm with a girl from the school. He and only he must ask for permission every step of the way or it is rape and punishable by the school under the disciplinary boards.
Actually I'm OK with this. Although I would like women to be the ones asking it works out for men that we have a set of rules to follow.
As long a guy follows these rules no one can screw him over later.
= = =
You are right but at the moment it will shall we say unscrew him, or do you not think that is a huge turn off for women to ask every step of the way?
b
One more observation. . . Where are you from? Most men in the US spell the male version of your name Gene . . . my guess Canada or France or heritage there of?
b
March 6th, 2008 at 1:48 am
You are right but at the moment it will shall we say unscrew him, or do you not think that is a huge turn off for women to ask every step of the way?
Great! Honestly, there are worse things than not getting laid. And remember, if guys aren't getting any then neither are the girls. And if it turns the women off then that's their problem. If they don't like it then let them complain to Gloria Steinem. Who knows maybe these rules will wake those women up to how screwed up rape hysteria is.
I really don't see a downside here.
One more observation. . . Where are you from? Most men in the US spell the male version of your name Gene . . . my guess Canada or France or heritage there of?
I'm from Kentucky. Descended from Hugonoughts. But the name Jean Valjean was a character his Victor Hugo's novel "Les Miserables". It's a story about a criminal who eventually redeems himself. It's an excellent book. Read it and you will know why I use this pseudonym.
March 6th, 2008 at 2:05 am
Rachel (or other feminists), if you are reading this, note on Glenn's home page that there is a topic listed for feministing.com having beer ads on their web site (a couple topics below this one).
Now heed this:
Feminists' posting of beer ads on their web sites, is a specific behaviour which lies somewhere along a continuum - which at one end has the most seemingly innocuous behavior, of drunk feminists sitting around at a party taking digs at men; and at the other far end, lies the act of a women going out at night with a guy, getting drunk and having sex with him on purpose, then walking into a "rape crisis center" the next day and claiming she was "raped under the influence"..thus making a charge which will result in the ruin of a man's life.
March 6th, 2008 at 2:25 am
Kevin,
you are entitled to disagree with Jay R's logic if you wish. But to accuse someone of playing "mind games" simply for adopting a different logic is ridiculous.
This was the quote from you that started this thing off.
"The only reason feminists have the power they do now is because we did nothing to stop them. How is that their fault?"
This quote from you implies that feminists are not to blame because nobody opposed them. The point Jay R was making is that the fact that men have been slower to oppose feminism does not absolve feminists of responsibility.
The argument about whether men should do something or blame feminists is the ultimate false dichotomy. Men should BOTH do something AND blame feminists.
March 6th, 2008 at 2:42 am
Masculist said
"I envision a "new chivalry"........where people, male and female alike, treat each other with the same courtesy, kindness, virtue, and empathy that men have traditionally displayed to women before the abolition of old fashioned male-on-female chivalry."
This would be desirable but I'm not sure how likely it would be.
One of the reasons why women have more psychological and emotional power over men is because males are conditioned from a young age to try to please women. A lot of this gets back to the fact that in most families mothers have more influence over their sons than fathers have over their daughters. This trend has been exacerbated by the declining role of fathers and the increase in single-mother households. To a large extent males are conditioned to believe that their moral worth as human beings is strongly tied to their ability to please women. Add to this a culture and media that teaches that men are to blame for all women's problems, and women have a vast reserve of guilt and shame to use against men. On the other hand society does not teach females that their moral worth is based on their ability to please men. Instead, society teaches women that they should only do anything for men if it is part of a strategy to get more in return.
Society basically says that men owe women everything while women owe men nothing. Women who choose to remain single are lauded as modern independent women. Men who choose to remain single are vilified as selfish commitmentphobic losers. A man's obligation is to his wife and children. A woman's obligation is to herself and other women.
Women are able to shame men if they don't do what women want, precisely because women have more emotional power over men. Men have more difficulty doing this to women, simply because women are not taught to feel responsible for men's problems.
March 6th, 2008 at 8:32 am
Offended Dad wrote: Wow, Mister-M, you just put the whole thing in perspective for me.
My ex is a BPD. Every feminist rant I've ever read sounds just like one of her rants, with the same faulty logic, inflated statistics, vague and contradictory definitions, and constant belittling.
It probably goes without saying, but she's got a well established history of false allegations. Nothing's ever been done to her, but she's in court now for a civil suit related to malicious prosecution.
Obviously, my feelings are no joke. While the feminist movement is probably doesn't entirely meet some of the DSM-IV diagnostic criteria for BPD - the simiarities are uncanny.
There are nine traits or symptoms that need to be met in order to make a diagnosis of BPD:
1. Frantic efforts to avoid real or imagined abandonment.
2. A pattern of unstable and intense interpersonal relationships characterized by alternating between extremes of idealization and devaluation.
3. Identity disturbance: markedly and persistently unstable self-image or sense of self.
4. Impulsivity in at least two areas that are potentially self-damaging (e.g., spending, sex, substance abuse, reckless driving, binge eating).
5. Recurrent suicidal behavior, gestures, or threats, or self-mutilating behavior.
6. Affective instability due to a marked reactivity of mood (e.g., intense episodic dysphoria, irritability, or anxiety usually lasting a few hours and only rarely more than a few days).
7. Chronic feelings of emptiness.
8. Inappropriate, intense anger or difficulty controlling anger (e.g., frequent displays of temper, constant anger, recurrent physical fights).
9. Transient, stress-related paranoid ideation or severe dissociative symptoms.
When you consider that as much as 2% of our population have it and generally accepted estimates put 3/4ths or more of those suffering from it - women, you make the call.
Of course, I've probably just floated another reason that will further entrench their perpetual victim status and excuses to justify their behavior. So much like anything else in this arena, it's a double-edged sword.
March 6th, 2008 at 8:37 am
Nick S, really great post.
March 6th, 2008 at 10:32 am
Nick S Says …
Kevin,
---“you are entitled to disagree with Jay R's logic if you wish.”
Thank you Nick, I appreciate that.
---“But to accuse someone of playing "mind games" simply for adopting a different logic is ridiculous.”
I didn’t accuse him of playing mind games; I told him I *thought* he was playing mind games. There is a huge difference.
---“This was the quote from you that started this thing off.”
["The only reason feminists have the power they do now is because we did nothing to stop them. How is that their fault?"]
Wrong again Nick. That is a partial quote that “started this thing off”.
---“This quote from you implies that feminists are not to blame because nobody opposed them. The point Jay R was making is that the fact that men have been slower to oppose feminism does not absolve feminists of responsibility.”
Wrong again Nick. I didn’t imply that they are not to blame because no one opposed them; I’m saying that after the fact it really doesn’t matter. You would have to read my whole statement to understand the context of that sentence. I never said they were absolved from anything. As a matter of fact, at the end of the day, their feet should be held to the fire.
---“The argument about whether men should do something or blame feminists is the ultimate false dichotomy. Men should BOTH do something AND blame feminists.”
Finally something we agree on, but the only problem is that it’s your argument not mine. My contention is men should do something and stop blaming feminists for a problem that we were ultimately responsible for.
In my opinion, both you and Jay R. are engaged in straw man tactics. You take one sentence of my statement and try to refute my whole statement based on that one sentence taken out of its intended context.
Kevin Merck
March 6th, 2008 at 10:43 am
Dan M says ...
---“You say this board and others like it do no good, yet it's read by hundreds of thousands of beady little eyes each month.”
Dan, that is a bold-faced lie and you know it. It’s impossible to have an honest conversation with someone who tells lies like this. You can’t show me any statement I ever made that supports that obscene accusation.
Kevin Merck
March 6th, 2008 at 11:22 am
I was banned by many female moderators in divorce recovery type blogs from sharing what I observed. Mostly descriptions of what I saw in family court triggered the ban.
The media does a similar thing through editors. Sometimes what is not said sheds more light than what is said.
March 6th, 2008 at 11:33 am
Women are able to shame men if they don't do what women want, precisely because women have more emotional power over men. Men have more difficulty doing this to women, simply because women are not taught to feel responsible for men's problems.
It's even more deep than that. Look at your average male. Grew up as a boy seeing mom 90% of the time. Goes into school where 90% of the teachers are female. Turns 18 and graduates.
To this boy, what is "being a man"?
It's been defined by women his whole life. Women, in today's society, define "manhood" for the majority of men, and often include "pleasing women" as part of the definition. This has been a issue since our transformation from an agrarian based society to an industrial based society (and, noticeably, not long after that transformation was near complete women got the right to vote and the women's movement began). Modern women are not blind to this. Often you will hear one telling a guy to "be a man" meaning, really, to do what she wants him to do.
How many of us men have ever told a gal to "be a woman"? Anyone? Are we accepting the answer that only women can define womanhood?
And we wonder why we are losing the fight? Women control both sides of the game. Why do you think there is so much resistance to shared parenting? That would allow men to define manhood for boys, which is way to dangerous for feminists.
March 6th, 2008 at 12:02 pm
Great reply nick (at time 2:42). And of course, my vision of the "new chivalry" was more of a fantasy than reality anyhow..........
MXY
March 6th, 2008 at 1:33 pm
Kevin:
Perhaps I mischaratcterize, in any case I'm not going to search through posts to support my position, so I'll go with your position. Are you then telling me that all the time spent working out counters to feminist arguments, finding the flaws in the reasoning and refining our message....are you telling me you honestly believe feminism has and had nothing to do with the problems we face? Or are you simply contending "what's done is done - let's just fix it and ignore the feminists"? Because if you ask me, they created this society on purpose, and they're fighting against us to keep it.
How exactly do YOU, Kevin, suggest we proceed?
March 6th, 2008 at 2:23 pm
Mister-M Wrote :
March 6th, 2008 at 8:32 am
Obviously, my feelings are no joke. While the feminist movement is probably doesn't entirely meet some of the DSM-IV diagnostic criteria for BPD - the simiarities are uncanny.
There are nine traits or symptoms that need to be met in order to make a diagnosis of BPD:
1. Frantic efforts to avoid real or imagined abandonment.
2. A pattern of unstable and intense interpersonal relationships characterized by alternating between extremes of idealization and devaluation.
3. Identity disturbance: markedly and persistently unstable self-image or sense of self.
4. Impulsivity in at least two areas that are potentially self-damaging (e.g., spending, sex, substance abuse, reckless driving, binge eating).
5. Recurrent suicidal behavior, gestures, or threats, or self-mutilating behavior.
6. Affective instability due to a marked reactivity of mood (e.g., intense episodic dysphoria, irritability, or anxiety usually lasting a few hours and only rarely more than a few days).
7. Chronic feelings of emptiness.
8. Inappropriate, intense anger or difficulty controlling anger (e.g., frequent displays of temper, constant anger, recurrent physical fights).
9. Transient, stress-related paranoid ideation or severe dissociative symptoms.
When you consider that as much as 2% of our population have it and generally accepted estimates put 3/4ths or more of those suffering from it - women, you make the call.
Of course, I've probably just floated another reason that will further entrench their perpetual victim status and excuses to justify their behavior. So much like anything else in this arena, it's a double-edged sword.
To quote a book title concering living with a BPD: "I hate you! Don't leave me!". That is the most concise description of the last 8 years that I've ever seen. (I haven't read that book, it was reccommended to me).
The problem is, like most psychopaths and sociopaths, BPD's are very convincing. They are experts at appealing not to our fears, but to our sympathies. Only when their stories start to fall apart and they're not getting what they want anymore do they get violent and nasty. They genuinely believe that a scorched earth approach is necessary.
March 6th, 2008 at 2:31 pm
Offended Dad - I would go so far as to say that even the "fear of abandonment" line is a sympathy ploy that the shrinks have bought into. In my experience, BPDs don't act the way they do because of "abandonment issues". It is simply that playing the victim has brought more benefits than costs throughout their life. Stop the rewards for victimhood, stop the behavior.
March 6th, 2008 at 2:36 pm
I remember my dad telling me more than once growing up that if a person lies to you about one thing, they will lie to you about anything, and once they’ve violated your trust, be very reluctant to give them another chance.
I’ve found over the years that that’s the best advice I’ve ever received.
In answer to your question … take personal responsibility. That’s what everyone has to do. It’s not a blame game and most of the debates were settled before we were ever born. All we need to do is enforce the law and it’s going to take a concerted effort on the part everyone capable of reason and compassion to get the job done.
Ask yourself this question?
Am I doing everything possible to bring about change? If the answer is yes, then you have no reason to be offended by my comments.
March 6th, 2008 at 2:53 pm
Kevin Merck said: I didn’t accuse him of playing mind games; I told him I *thought* he was playing mind games. There is a huge difference.
The only reason feminists have the power they do now is because we did nothing to stop them. How is that their fault?"
Kevin then goes on to say this was taken out of context and that he doesn't mean men are to blame.
But then Kevin says: Finally something we agree on, but the only problem is that it’s your argument not mine. My contention is men should do something and stop blaming feminists for a problem that we were ultimately responsible for.
So which is it Kevin? Are we to blame or aren't we?
March 6th, 2008 at 3:00 pm
It's even more deep than that. Look at your average male. Grew up as a boy seeing mom 90% of the time. Goes into school where 90% of the teachers are female. Turns 18 and graduates.
To this boy, what is "being a man"
I think in the long run this works in our favor although we may not be around to reap the reward. Women raising boys teaches boys to be like women--not like men. This means that boys will grow up to be selfish and petty just like women. They will be even more discontented by unfair laws governing their gender. They won't be learning those chivalric attitudes that their father would have taught them.
So in that sense it helps men more than women. But it doesn't do a thing for this generation of men.
March 6th, 2008 at 3:56 pm
Just deleted a round of insults between posters, and it took forever due to the blog program's incredible slowness. Get back on topic and stop wasting my time.
March 7th, 2008 at 12:22 am
It is interesting to me that when almost every thread on Glenn's blog goes analytical, all the female voices disappear.
I have my own theory.
But Davina, Celia, Besty, Rosemarie, Melissa and the new girls will have a problem with my argument.
And not because they cannot argue......
But if you review the threads, the women's comments get a little thin when real philosophy is invoked.
March 8th, 2008 at 1:07 am
Regarding all the information posted about a mental disorder, it would be far better to refer the person to a web site. I don't think you gave the whole picture, for example certain of the symptoms come and go over time.
July 31st, 2008 at 10:47 am
[...] rape, sexism I was reading old blog posts on glensacks.com today and found this: http://glennsacks.com/blog/?p=1884. Now, I'm not a huge fan of Mr. Sacks, I feel he is sometimes too extreme, too conservative, [...]
July 31st, 2008 at 10:57 am
I just read this piece (and the related feminist pieces). I always have slightly mixed feelings about Glenn's stuff. I was raised in a fairly strong feminist environment and have had a lot of exposure to the other side of the argument, and sometimes they get it bang on. Having said that... the rape stats thing strikes me as completely ridiculous.
I had to throw my thoughts together and did a fairly long post on my blog: http://logic11.wordpress.com/2008/07/31/vitriol-and-pain/
Thanks for writing Glenn, I don't always agree with all of it, but I do with a lot of it and believe that it needs to be said.
August 8th, 2008 at 1:21 pm
Thanks, Roy! What about me? Am I a new girl? I've been here for years . . .
And I'm very analytical. Did it ever occur to you that maybe they're just reading and agreeing with you? I've not found anything so far to argue with or add to.
In any case, moving on . . .
Actually, the comments about how in person these feminists are probably the ones who get in your face and scream reminded me of new years, 3 years ago.
I'd brought my fiancee to a New Years party I was invited to by a female co-worker. She was married happily, but a friend of hers was a radical feminist. This radical feminist I had NEVER met before (and neither had my boyfriend) spent the entire night accusing him of being unfaithful.
Not unfaithful with her, or with anyone she knew of . . . her strong held belief was that EVERY man had cheated on his sig. other at least once, and she spent the whole night harassing him and trying to get him to admit that he'd cheated on me at some point in the past 8 years we have been together.
She refused to accept from me or him that we were just that happy with each other and that even when he had opportunities (like my best female friend who would come over and help him clean the house when he lost his job and was being the house husband) he never even wanted to.
I could very easily see her argument changed to "every man rapes somebody". She definitely was the "get in your face" and "scream at you" type. I had to tell her many times to back off and that she was totally psycho.
----
But, since Roy clearly wants some women to start saying something, I'll give my take on it all.
I just had my first "college rape meeting" for my new college. Fortunately for the people putting on this demonstration, they said that men also get sexually assaulted (though they didn't say by which gender and I'm sure they meant other men) because I was already questioning everything they were saying rather vocally.
I agree that things are very gray in the rape area. I also believe that there probably two ways that rape can be divided: rape for the sake of a power-trip (often strangers and serial rapists) or rape where the man knows the woman and it's more for actual sexual pleasure.
One thing I would be curious about, however, is if any of the men on this forum have ever forced a woman to have sex with them? I'm sure nobody would admit to it . . . but I would be interested if Glenn would do his own anonymous poll of his readership to see how many would "force sex on someone if they could get away with it" as some of the articles stated many men anonymously admitted to.
Some women certainly put themselves into situations where there is a lot of alcohol. Men do it too. Then they both get drunk. If they have sex, it's their own faults - both of them. (Assuming there are no unusual mitigating circumstances)
I guess it's like someone taking their brand-new sports car into the ghetto and going into a bar. When he comes back out to find his car is gone, who do we blame? The criminals, or the idiot for thinking his car *wouldn't* get stolen?
It's all about taking risks. Yes, I'm a woman and I say that women should be able to have a few drinks at a public place and dress provocatively without getting raped. But if a girl goes to a private party and gets really drunk knowing that this is where many people end up having sex, is she a victim or just really stupid? If she has sex with a drunk guy, then they both made a drunken choice. It's not necessarily rape. If she decides later it was a mistake, doe that mean she has a right to say it was rape? Not in my opinion.
Maybe I'm too hard on people, but I have high standards of intellect and few meet them.
August 8th, 2008 at 5:27 pm
Oh, here's an interesting site with some interesting links:
(Glenn noted his interest in the polls, so I found some interesting ones)
At this poll, you'll find 85% of the poll answerers are men, out of about 80, to the question of whether a man in a certain situation was raped. and 75% or so believed he was.
http://www.misterpoll.com/polls/344540/results
And here, 3% out of 76 male answerers (if they are actually men replying and not people skewing the results) said they had raped a woman before. (3 of them) Yet 14-15 of them admitted that they had been raped by a man or group of men. And 6 of them said a woman had raped them.
http://www.misterpoll.com/polls/328604/results
Granted, these are internet polls with fewer replies than polls in magazines. But they are quite interesting.
Here is one with over a thousand participants: http://www.misterpoll.com/polls/42996/results
What do you all think?
February 14th, 2009 at 11:08 am
I'm not sure if this has been mentioned (and I realize I'm a year late on this discussion) but I took a look at the .pdf from the Bureau provided by Nora Niedzielski-Eichner, and it seems her own statistics support Heather MacDonald's position - you know, that "...outdated and deliberately misleading" article she wrote.
Heather's main point was that the 25% statistic is a gross exaggeration. Nora doesn't bother to really get into the data, but does provide some references - presumably assuming that no one would bother to read her linked sources. Well, I did, and the Bureau states quite plainly that a university consisting of around 10,000 females can expect approximately 350 rapes a year. I'm no math major... but isn't that well below 25%?
A large university, with young college students getting drunk constantly, for many of them their first taste of freedom - these numbers hardly sound like a 'rape culture' to me.