Is rape that big a deal?

[Phebe]

You asked me if in the story he persuaded her. "If she changed her mind because of his powerful communication skills he persuaded her.
Now, do you think persuasion is O.K. or not? Is it rape or not?"


I've read this story again and nothing like "persuasion" occurred. That, of course, is why I like the story. She changed her mind because she wanted to. He left her free from persuasion and (not coincidentally) that was the result.

[InternetDevil]

I think that if something as serious as a rape charge is involved, a woman has to communicate NO very clearly.  Otherwise it is a game with a man's life.

[Sir Jessy of Anti]

Maybe I have a totally different perspective than you do.

You seem to have the "deliberately misunderstanding" perspective.  That's the perspective where Renegade uses clear language to say that women sometimes exploit men with their sexuality, and you go on to ignore what he said, instead introducing red herrings like the Taliban and women not being responsible for the way men react to their sexual exploitation.   The logical conclusion of this then, is for men to not give women any leeway on the basis of their sexuality alone.

And BTW - playing dumb is different from actually being dumb.

[InternetDevil]

Maybe I have a totally different perspective than you do.

    Unfortunatly your perspective is shared by fifty million women in US alone, so you may be the majority.  That is against a hundred thousand men who take their rights seriously and thirty thousand women who value men's rights.  In reality you win.

    But online only extraordinary views are mostly expressed -- of those who consider men equal to women on one hand and of extreme misandrists on the other.  In the past I have called you a typical peoson, but now I realise that an ordinary person leaving record of their opinion is outstanding.

[Phebe]

Well, it's called murder, and a few other things.

1) Sidewalks are a recent invention, limited to the USA.
2) The USA has not existed for a millennia.
3) Ardument null and void.

Okay, metaphor is not your thing, I see.

If I was to open a male only club, to avoid these women, I would be sued for sexual discrimination.

Really? In Britain you can't do that? You can in America, and it's such a great idea: all men who believe women are dressing nice to illicitly excite them should belong to male-only clubs for mutual protection. That would fit great with the marriage strike, too. Totally avoid women, and then angry men wouldn't have to worry about women dressing to get them all excited. And women would have a lower incidence of rape. Sounds like a real win--win to me!

more men have been drafted into wars and dies in the last 100 years than women raped.

Men draft men, men fight men, and men rape women. I'm not sure of the relevance or point of the argument you are making. Seems to me to be a series of man-caused problems all around.

So, Whatever? Or is being shot less traumatic/painful?

Depends on whether rape or being shot is more painful and traumatic in any given case, I guess. Maybe we should ask John Kerry.

[Phebe]

red herrings like the Taliban and women not being responsible for the way men react....<snip>

We aren't responsible for the way men react. That's key; that's the most important point, perhaps, of feminism. It's not about us. It's your feelings, your actions, your reactions. It's not our problem, or it shouldn't be. We can't help it that men have these biological things. We're just trying to get home from work, do the shopping, get the garden weeded, feed the baby: it's not our fault that men get excited. Men need to take responsibility for that instead of trying to blame it on women. The Taliban is the most explicit expression of this in the modern world, but there is a lot of this thinking implicit and even explicit in these posts.

The logical conclusion of this then, is for men to not give women any leeway on the basis of their sexuality alone.

WhatEVER it takes to stop rape. Whatever. That would be great. Let's do it.

[InternetDevil]

WhatEVER it takes to stop rape. Whatever. That would be great. Let's do it.

Including jailing more innocent men (to make sure the guilty ones are caught).

[Phebe]

No, I don't mean that, ID. I don't want us to do that.

[InternetDevil]

No, I don't mean that, ID. I don't want us to do that.

Unfortunatly the judges who lower the burden of proof (rather then investing into making new ways of proof beyound reasonable doubt possible) think differently.  Fortunatly I am happily married, and will have no one-night stands.

[Q]

Okay, metaphor is not your thing, I see.

Metaphor I can handle.  Blatent misrepresentation of the subject at hand - now that gets me worked up.

Really? In Britain you can't do that?

Correct.  So, next suggestion?  And I do believe that in the US, they have problems with this.  Wasn;t there a post about a mens locker room that adjoins a grill here a few weeks ago?

Depends on whether rape or being shot is more painful and traumatic in any given case, I guess.

Let me help you here.  For one of these conditions you give morphine.  The other you don't.

Men draft men, men fight men, and men rape women. I'm not sure of the relevance or point of the argument you are making. Seems to me to be a series of man-caused problems all around.  

You know, I could have sworn that women could vote....and as I recall, there are more women of voting age inthe US/UK then men.

My point is this. Given that of the 11 adjectives you listed for rape, 10 can be directly applied to soldiers injured in battle (hell, most men in battle, let alone the injured).

Therefore, given that far less is said about soldiers then rape, rape is blown vastly out of preportion.  

We aren't responsible for the way men react.

If I walk into a police station, pull out a gun and point it at someone, I will be responsible for being shot.

Women dress, and wear make up to influence the reaction of men.  Therefore you are directly accountable for the effect of that reaction.  

You manipulate for an effect, you live with the consequences of that effect.  You lie about your age to join the army?  You get sent to war.

You attract the attention of men?  You have to put up with their unwanted advances.

Give out misleading "signals", and never state your mind?  Be prepared to be misunderstood.

but there is a lot of this thinking implicit and even explicit in these posts.

Better to say that we are prepared to take responsibility for our actions, and expect others to do the same.

WhatEVER it takes to stop rape. Whatever. That would be great. Let's do it.

Well, lets lock up women.  Or abolish the crime.  Or legalise prostitution.  Or jail innocent people.  Or....

[Sir Jessy of Anti]

red herrings like the Taliban and women not being responsible for the way men react....<snip>

We aren't responsible for the way men react. That's key; that's the most important point, perhaps, of feminism. It's not about us. It's your feelings, your actions, your reactions. It's not our problem, or it shouldn't be. We can't help it that men have these biological things. We're just trying to get home from work, do the shopping, get the garden weeded, feed the baby: it's not our fault that men get excited. Men need to take responsibility for that instead of trying to blame it on women. The Taliban is the most explicit expression of this in the modern world, but there is a lot of this thinking implicit and even explicit in these posts.

There is none of that in my posts, or in the post Renegade made that started this from what I can see.  He wasn't addressing your red herring - he was addressing the tendency of some women to exploit men through the use of their sexuality, and I think indeed there is a component of culpability there for women (and in this instance we are NOT referring to men's reactions in situations like rape or the like).

Women do use their sexuality to exploit men sometimes: FACT.   They should be responsible for their right to be assertive in this manner and admit that they can do it:  FACT.
It is wrong to rape and blame your provocation on a woman:  FACT.

Now did you hear anyone say different regarding that last line in this conversation?  I'm going to say this really simply and slowly...women    are not responsible for men's actions, but they are responsible for theirs.
If a person walks up and strikes another person bigger than them, then they can expect to get hit back.  That's called understanding possible consequences.  Your rhetoric sounds  a lot like you demand the right to strike the bigger person without expecting any retaliation.  That's called bullying.

I think it is wrong to expect others are responsible for how they react, no matter the stimuli.  That is too simplistic.  It all depends on the stimuli you give them.

A punch in the face for example is harsh stimuli, likely to lead to an equal or more powerful reaction.  You seem to demand cause without effect.

[Sir Jessy of Anti]

Men draft men, men fight men, and men rape women. I'm not sure of the relevance or point of the argument you are making. Seems to me to be a series of man-caused problems all around.

Abu Ghraib, anyone?   Women serve on draft boards (without being required to die), women fight men (50% of DV initiation according to over 100+ scholarly studies), and women do rape men (usually the weaker - i.e. children and young adults).  Women can act pretty badly too so let's just drop the 'women are innocent' rhetoric.  The history of women leaders disproves that, unless you think all of these great women of history had no minds of their own and were coerced into collusion with the patriarchy.  In which case feminists can park their brain at the door, as it likely won't stop them from championing the achievements of these 'independent women' in the revisionist herstory books.

[Oldfellow]

Greetings all - this is the first post of a longtime lurker so please be gentle.  I can't resist putting my 2 cents in on this having watched Pheebs use the same logic on other threads.  Pheeb - you seem to think that the interactions of men and women occur independently (men do/are responsible for men stuff, women do/are responsible for women stuff).  What an interesting world view.  Many women I know and respect say that a man won't do much of anything worthwhile (in their view) unless a woman makes him do it.  Similarly, I'm told by several of my female colleagues that men are so easy to manipulate sexually that they are truly pathetic.  After observing life for many decades now, I would say the following:

Most men I know are driven to protect and defend their families.  Historically, warfare and violence are the result of humans competing for scarce resources.  That is, the motives behind many conflicts is to protect and provide for women and children.  You seem to think that men fight wars for sport.  If you had ever been in one you would realize that there is NOTHING fun about war and I don't know any male who wishes he could go fight another one.
 
Pheeb - do you really think that the world is a nasty brutal place because of the violent and competitive nature of males OR is the violent and competitive nature of males the result of the world being a nasty brutal place?  If women were in charge, would we all just share??  I think the world has many hard realities of which you are either unaware or in a dreamy denial of.

Also, my experience on the planet tells me that women obviously do use their sexuality to manipulate and exploit men (it's their primary weapon followed closely by bitching).  I see it everyday and see women boasting about it everyday. It could be as simple as getting special treatment at the store or catching that "perfect man" at work. I like the 80/20 rule:  women who dress provocatively are trying to attract the attention of a small group (20%) of the men they encounter.  If you are in the unfortunate 80%, then any advances you make could be construed as harrassment or worse. Of course, in your view, the woman will always make her intents perfectly clear through a mixture of body language and indirect comments. If only the men were bright enough to notice we wouldn't have any of these nasty misunderstandings (this is sarcasm).

Anyway, nice trolling.  You even got me to do my first post!

[Mr. Nickle]

Phebe, you have out-contorted yourself this time. You have ducked, dodged and weaved so much you're making people dizzy. You've backed yourself into so many corners with contradictory statements on this thread that you've had to resort to your old "men rape, men make war - that's what they do" trick. You know that one - the one I warned everyone about when you landed here in your trollmobile.

http://www.standyourground.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=35699

I'm just surprised it took you this long to use it.

You are so SURE yours is the only way anyone can think that you suppose I am pretending not to understand some very unclear communications.

You are the only one who seems to have trouble with these 'unclear communications.' It seems that they are crystal clear to everyone else. If the topics here are too complex for you maybe you should find a less challenging forum.

[Gabriel]

The topic has drifted a bit, I thought that might happen. Though, I don't see much of an argument for why rape is a big deal or worse deal than any other crime. It seems to be that it is not.