On rape and men

[pusifoot]

Sinboy posted this link yesterday. I'm reposting it here because even though a number of you also read him, a number of you don't, and I feel that everyone I know should read this. Read the comments too

Comments

[karenbynight]

I would bet my life that none of my partners would rape anyone

[pusifoot]

The comments are why I linked it. What you say is so true:

every woman you meet is probably sizing you up as to whether or not she thinks you might, given the proper circumstances, rape her

Precisely. I do this. I do this to *everyone*. It is automatic, it is instinctive, it is a survival trait. It is utterly depressing that it must be this way, but until the world changes, it must be, or women risk being raped because they have one drink too many.

Drunken consent *isn't* unless it was negotiated while sober. Stoned consent *isn't* unless it was negotiated while sober. Consent *isn't* when it's under duress or in any situation other than a clear-headed negotiation. It doesn't have to be verbal, but it does have to be done with all of the involved parties in full possession of their faculties.

And a woman should not have to stay sober because if she gets drunk she might get raped. That's like saying a woman shouldn't wear a short skirt because she might get raped. She wasn't "asking for it".

[psi_star_psi]

I assume that every woman I pass is sizing me up in this way, and probably also shielding her children from me. When I am walking, I have sometimes gone out of my way to avoid encroaching on the space of a woman walking by herself.

It pisses me off no end that this is necessary to make both me and her comfortable.

I tend toward the Heinlein view of rapists (out the airlock they go), but I've led too sheltered a life to be in any situations to test my ethics as a second-party observer. I'd like to think that speaks well of my choice of company, but it may simply be luck.

[pusifoot]

You're a geek.

It's been my experience that geeks have a higher Nice Guy/Asshole ratio than the Really Real World.

You're also not an idiot. You Think About Stuff. You look beyond just what you're doing to it's possible consequences. You get that action A has result B and unexpected results C, D, Q and purple.

It's one of the reasons why I'm delighted that you and aelfie had children. Your kids have the advantage of having parents with a clue. And while it's a long and slow process, you're instilling in them the values now that will, when Ike and Gray are 21 and partying in college, hopefully enable them to be That Guy. For that and so many other reasons, I love you both.

[lordsaphon]

I consider myself lucky that I've never been in a situation where I've been around a woman like she's discussing. I've never been in a situation where someone has lost all control and is practically 'open and available' and had to come to those moral decisions.

I like, very much, to believe that I would be That guy... and I have driven ladies home, for no other reason then 'because it's late, and I want to make sure you get home safe'... so I like to think I am.

But, she's got a damned good set of points. I wish more guys could remember that the whole chivalry and treating a woman like a LADY actually does have SOME merit in this world.

[vvvexation]

While I appreciate your intentions, I must differ on one point: treating women like "ladies" instead of like people is in fact part of the problem. For example, "ladies" (as most people who use the term seem to understand it) can't ever acknowledge when they do want sex, so "of course" men have to just assume they want it even if they say they don't.

Helping to protect women from rape is all well and good, but perpetuating an image of women as delicate flowers poses its own set of problems.

[lordsaphon]

I won't disagree with you there, and I'm willing to concede a poor choice of words on my part

[bryozoan]

Thanks. I replied on the linked lj entry with my more academic-minded thoughts.

I also wanted to personally say thanks for your previous personal help in dealing with the social consequences of my having no tolerance whatsoever for a public conversation that trivalizes sex and/or women.

(I have *zero* tolerance for a culture where men might think for a *moment* that assault and rape is alright. I also admit to being *incredibly* fast to react to "sexual social pressure" conversations.)

[pusifoot]

You are welcome

[elgecko]

This is exactly like saying every white person is a potential Nazi. It's technically true, by virtue of the fact that every white person is human, but why the hell say it other than to reveal your own fears that the next bogieman is going to get you?

[pusifoot]

Why do I say it? Because the boogieman HAS gotten me. Repeatedly. Between the ages of 6 and 10 when I couldn't defend myself, and at the age of 21 when I didn't defend myself

[elgecko]

I understand these things. I've been victimised and injured on the basis of race and I was forced to do real damage in self-defence to more than one person in order to get it to stop. But you will *never* see me make a post (or link to one) about how I will never trust white people again. Therein lies my problem with the premise of the original post and the concept of linking to it.

INDIVIDUALS did evil to you, and to me. Not "men", not "white people", not "Americans". Individuals who were evil.

[cuddlycthulhu]

Except for the fact that most of the time it is men who rape, regardless of ethnicity, religion, or country of origin. I think you're trivalizing the very real fear that abuse survivors come to live with.

Additionally, there is some truth in the statement "If you're not part of the solution then you're part of the problem."