Mods are asleep! Here's some actual drama. "Instead of telling men not to rape, which is extremely insulting and misandrist, we should teach women how to reduce the odds of being raped." (np.reddit.com)
SubredditDrama
296 ups - 140 downs = 156 votes
243 comments submitted at 12:51:12 on Jan 9, 2014 by david-me
Nice victim blaming there bro.
I mean, anyone with half a brain should realize that having sex with someone against their will is kinda bad.
Damn, it is? Well, guess I've got some shame-faced apologies to make.
Hallmark has cards. They work pretty well.
Yeah, how about we just blame rapists for rape instead of entire genders or victims? Why is this a hard concept for so many people?
[deleted]
>femNazis >Fem Sluts
You lose all credibility with the use of only one of these words. Bravo.
Such troll. That's not what he said idiot
You have no idea how stupid you sound, do you?
Actually, the reason this is a hard concept to get across is every time anyone tries, someone like you shows up.
But studies have shown that that's not necessarily true. Rapists often don't think of what they did as rape, which is why rape education for men had been on the uptick. Sure you and I are knowledgeable enough to say that Asshat McGee taking advantage of a passed-out-drunk person is a rapist, but he might not.
If you had actually read, the author came to some bullshit conclusions.
Stating that the men who raped or attempted to rape didn't see themselves as rapists because no one bothered to ask them about what they did using the term "rape". What the fuck kind of logic is that?
Read the questions asked: http://pastebin.com/gcCiFcft
Never once, anywhere in that study or followup to the study did those men say that they did not see themselves as rapists. That is a conclusion that someone not even associated with the study made based on bullshit dumb logic. "OH BECAUSE NO ONE ASKED THEM IF THEY EVER RAPED ANYONE (despite using the clearest definition of rape in the questions) THEN THEY MUST NOT THINK THAT THEY'RE RAPISTS!"
By this article alone, I can assume that Amanda Hess is a fucking retard and sensationalist.
Quick, someone ask me if I'm a rapist!
Well...?
Alright, we'll go the roundabout way. Know any rapists bro?
Do you reckon that they would have said "yes" if the researchers had asked "have you ever raped anyone?"
You don't get to assume shit when making headlines such as "Rapists who don't think they are rapists" and then have people like Fibbley_dee quote it as "studies have shown". Studies didn't show that. Studies showed that a very small percentage of people repeatedly rape or attempt rape and by removing the small number of repeaters, it's believe that sexual assaults can be reduced by at least 25%. THAT is what studies showed in regards to the linked studies.
It's bullshit until you go up to those people and ask them, "do you think of yourself as a rapist", and then we can definitively say whether or not they believe they are.
A fair point. It's true that the study is actually ambiguous on the participants' self-image. Notably, the source linked to by /u/fibbley_dee actually doesn't make the claim that the men don't self-identify as rapists (in fact it takes a very different approach), so that must have been added later.
Also, here's the full text of the original study, which also never mentions the self-identification of the participants.
>By this article alone, I can assume that Amanda Hess is a fucking retard and sensationalist.
Well, you pointed out a problem with that conclusion -- that it needed more support. Than you went really hyperbolic and started calling the person making it a retard. Despite that the conclusion seems pretty common sense, albeit unsupported by direct interpretations of the data.
Nice.
Considering you're really found of calling people "retards" and "fags" in your comment history, I'm going to assume that you're full of shit and probably have an agenda.
I don't get how you can jump from the information that study provides to "rapists don't think they're rapists". That has NOTHING to do with the study itself. The study examined a number of men and queried them in regards to whether or not they engaged in certain actions. It didn't query them as to whether or not they believed what they did was right or wrong or whether it was even rape.
So it's a huge fucking leap to say they didn't believe they were raping anyone. They may have known EXACTLY what they were doing. It's just annoying that someone jumps to that conclusion, publishes it in an editorial piece, and then people take it as "hey guys, look, rapists don't believe they're raping. that's how bad it is out there!". When that's not what happened at all.
As for my agenda, it's just being annoyed at ignorant things like that which perpetuate an image that doesn't seem to exist. It reinforces the argument that "oh well some guys just don't know they're raping" when so far, no study provided has shown this. It's like fucking Fox News up in here.
> Rapists often don't think of what they did as rape, which is why rape education for men had been on the uptick.
That might be (probably is?) true, but that study says nothing of the sort.
You can read the actual paper here, which lists this as the research question:
> The goal of the present study was to determine the proportion of self-reported rapists who commit multiple acts of rape undetected by the criminal justice system and to examine whether some proportion of rapists also admit to other forms of interpersonal violence. Further, we sought to study whether repeat rapists were responsible for a disproportionate share of this undetected interpersonal violence.
The question of whether rapists consider themselves to be rapists is not addressed at all...
It's not a direct interpretation of the data, no. It's a side conclusion that seems supported by intuitive logic, although it would definitely require a study of its own if someone wanted to construct expensive public policy off of that conclusion.
You do know that people make those sorts of side conclusions in all sorts of studies all the time, right?
The guy is going about it the wrong way, and being incredibly insensitive, but I agree with his main points. Every situation has risk, and you as an individual have choices to make that mitigate that risk.
For instance, if you choose to get black out drunk at a party, there is a higher risk that something is going to happen to you then if you had just gotten buzzed and caught a taxi with some friends home.
This does not in any way equal victim blaming. Rape is never the victims fault PERIOD. But there are ways that people can protect themselves that they often don't follow.
If you read further down that's what the troll account seems to be saying. I don't like his use of the victim being partly responsible however.
Edit: To clarify, I don't agree with his targeting only women in his rant, I feel both men and women could benefit from learning to minimize risk against themselves.
Yeah, I mean, people need to be cautious, but there is no guard against a shitty person.
Yeah, but you can avoid shitty people.
I see shitty people. Walking around like regular people. They don't see each other. They only see what they want to see. They don't know they're shitty.
They're everywhere.
True. In the sense of precaution, the risk of getting black out drunk at a frat party verse a small party is pretty clear.
In the case of the Stubenville victim, she was at a high school party with people she knew well. "The frat boy rapist" is another version of the "the man in the bushes". Most people don't show any caution around people they know, nor should they need to.
We'd call women who actually fear the most statistically likely people to rape them -- husbands, boyfriends, brothers, uncles, teachers, friends -- paranoid bitches. Instead we ask them to fear the people least likely to rape them: strangers.
Shit is fucked up.
The only "rape prevention" education people should have is the kind that tells them it's okay to say no, to resist the pressure to have sex, to report people that harass, assault, and rape them to the authorities. And that's not so much prevention as it is "this is your body, and nobody has the right to touch it without your permission." Which I can't believe how many people grow up intuitively not knowing; just allowing people to take advantage of them and pressure them into situations they don't want to be in.
I disagree. I think people should show caution even when around people they know because it's in their best interests. Personally I don't drink at all.
Risk mitigation isn't a bad thing. The problem with what he's saying is that he's saying "instead of teaching men not to rape, teach women risk mitigation." While I absolutely agree with his implication that not all rapists are men, I think trying to educate everyone, men and women alike, what rape is and how not to do it (because a surprising number of rapists don't think they are rapists) is vitally important. Saying that risk mitigation is the only type of education campaign we should be engaging in is very narrow-minded.
I agree, I plan on teaching my children, boys and girls, that there are very clear lines between consensual sexual relations and rape.
Or maybe I will just lock up my daughter in a stone tower behind the strongest and thickest steel room possible guarded by a terrible fire breathing dragon. That is also an acceptable idea. :p
I've seen Tangled, that doesn't end so well for you.
Option 2 sounds very expensive and impractical. I don't recommend going for that one.
But he gets a dragon!
Do you have any idea how much it costs to keep a dragon well-fed? Are you crazy??? You might as well buy 10 boats for all the money you're going to have to sink into that guy.
Can we put a dragon on the boat?
That's why you spread the word, and all the heroes showing up to try and save her get eaten, and you don't have to buy dragon chow!
Financially not the best choice... but on the other hand I get to avoid that super awkward conversation. And a dragon.
>The problem with what he's saying is that he's saying "instead of teaching men not to rape, teach women risk mitigation.
Because men totally aren't aware that rape is a bad thing and because it totally doesn't rank right right behind murder in our hierarchy of crime...
Did you read the article I linked? Clearly, the majority "get it" and aren't problems, but the problematic few don't "get it." Then, looking past the actual perps, are the much larger numbers of "enablers" who contribute to shaping the attitudes of said perps: http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2013/10/23/young-women-drinking-and-rape/blame-rapes-enablers-not-the-victims
[deleted]
I never claimed that men aren't taught not to rape. I claimed that anti-rape education of both women and men can help reduce rape rates, because clearly some folks aren't getting the message. They're a minority, but a hugely destructive one.
What's wrong with my use of the term "problematic few" to refer to the minority of people who commit rape? Do you disagree that those people cause problems?
>I claimed that anti-rape education of both women and men can help reduce rape rates, because clearly some folks aren't getting the message.
Do you also think that anti-murder education could help reduce murder rates and that a particularly slow segment of society hasn't yet figured out that murder is a bad thing? And how is it "clear" that some people haven't gotten the message? Do you think that with a sufficient amount of indoctrination that rape rates would go to zero?
>What's wrong with my use of the term "problematic few" to refer to the minority of people who commit rape?
The word "problematic" marks you as a Tumblr SJW.
> Do you also think that anti-murder education could help reduce murder rates and that a particularly slow segment of society hasn't yet figured out that murder is a bad thing? And how is it "clear" that some people haven't gotten the message?
Is there evidence that suggests this? Because I just linked you to the evidence that supports my claim.
>Do you think that with a sufficient amount of indoctrination that rape rates would go to zero?
No.
>The word "problematic" marks you as a Tumblr SJW.
Lol, k man. I don't ever go to Tumblr except via links in Tumblrinaction. Pretend I said "the rapist few" instead if that would be less...
(•_•)
( •_•)>⌐■-■
(⌐■_■)
problematic for you.
[deleted]
Yeah, I agree with this. It's also true that men are largely portrayed as rapists in today's day and age, and to try to teach "men" not to rape is kind of insulting and demeaning. It's like saying (a) men can't be victims of rape, (b) men are always the perpetrators, and (c) any man could be a potential threat. I mean, can you imagine the outrage if I started a campaign trying to teach "black people" not to "steal"? It would be valid and fucking insensitive, but apparently when it's men no one gives a fuck.
> It's also true that men are largely portrayed as rapists in today's day and age
There are two ways of interpreting this sentence. If you a saying 'men are generally portrayed as rapists' then, I respectfully disagree, I can't think of the last time I was portrayed as a rapist.
If you're saying that ' rapists are usually portrayed as men', well yes that's true.
How about you just teach people not to rape? The fact is most rapists (male and female) don't consider what they did to be rape. And your third point is frankly ridiculous because if you try to teach a woman how not to get raped, then she has to look at all men as potential abusers and be constantly paranoid. They're the ones most likely to rape her and no one is telling them not to because she should "be more responsible" and not do all the things men are perfectly able to do without worry like get blackout drunk or walk home alone at night
>How about you just teach people not to rape?
Why can't we do both? These ain't mutually exclusive concepts. "Honey, you need respect a man's boundaries, and also make sure you realize he might not respect yours." Congrats, you're victim blaming by advising your daughter.
>if you try to teach a woman how not to get raped, then she has to look at all men as potential abusers and be constantly paranoid.
Bullshit, when I'm walking down the street in a foreign ass city, I am making sure my wallet is protected because the crowd presents a potential risk. That doesn't mean I'm looking at every Frenchman as a potential mugger, just that I am aware of myself and my surroundings.
>not do all the things men are perfectly able to do without worry like get blackout drunk or walk home alone at night
Shit, if I walked home blackout drunk, I'd get mugged.
[deleted]
Wait is this post sarcastic, or a troll? You don't even understand what the statistic is saying. Please don't be serious....
Nope, 1 in 21 men were raped, usually by women.
I don't know what the corresponding number is for women, and your statement could be true. But that's not what your quote is saying, it's speaking only of men.
Ah, yeah. I misread the stat. Still, that's a far cry from 1 in 3 women.
Yeah, for sure. I'm always a bit hesitant on the 1 in 3 (not sure they're defined the same as the 1 in 21 and I haven't seen the definitions) but your probably right that it's still higher for women.
Everyone knows the 1/4 or 1/3 stat is complete bullshit
>A study done by the CDC found that 1 in 21 men (4.8%) reported that they had been forced to penetrate someone else, usually a woman
So if you know 21 men, chances are at least one of them was raped by a woman, and you're using that as proof that ... we need to focus more on men being rapists?
>It's pretty safe to say that men are doin' the vast majority of raping.
That does not mean the vast majority of men are rapists, and to treat them like they are is insensitive.
Racist? Really? My point was that if you target a group associated with a crime, it's insensitive, offensive, and alienating. I would never suggest a campaign trying to associate black people with crime, because that would be fucking racist. So what do you think I call a campaign trying to associate men with rape?
Sexist.
Also, the wording is super weird. Forced to penetrate? What if they themselves were penetrated? Strap ons, dildos, ect. I mean, it just seems really specific.
From the wording, it looks like the 1 in 21 is purely forced to penetrate, and excludes men who were penetrated, so no man-on-man or woman wielding a foreign object.
That's what I'm thinking too. I think that's not fair to the excluded men, and I don't think that's an honest representation, either.
But there are statistics to prove that the vast majority of rapes are perpetrated by us men. Why not educate us instead of blaming the victims?
And here I was raping everyone until somebody told me it was bad.
I don't want to blame victims. I do want to act as a pragmatist. If I ever have children, I'll tell my daughters and sons to be careful at parties, not accept drinks from strangers, and be wary of what signals they send because not all people understand consent. If something ever happened to one of them, I would not tell them they did anything wrong, even if they didn't take my advice. I would just be as supportive as possible.
Some feminists want me not to tell them to be careful, because apparently that insults all the people who have been raped, ever. Instead they want me to tell my daughters that at any point, any time, any place, a man might try to rape them. And they want me to tell my sons that they need to fight the urge they have to rape girls. This makes rape gendered, and makes any advice I give vague at best, and insulting men at worst.
>Some feminists want me not to tell them to be careful
No they don't.
You speak for all feminists? Good to know. I'll come to you in the future if I have questions.
Wait, I've already thought of one: should a woman walking home alone in a dangerous neighborhood be scared, or am I sexist for thinking that? Cause I'm getting some feminists on either side of this telling me I'm wrong.
>You speak for all feminists?
No but apparently your strawman does?
Feminists pointing out that we shouldn't blame victims doesn't mean we shouldn't be teaching children about safety. I don't park my car in the ghetto with the door open and keys in the ignition just because we've established the perp/victim when it comes to car theft more than we have with rape.
You're acting like feminists are encouraging parents to tell their children to put themselves in risky situations.
>I'll tell my daughters and sons to be careful at parties, not accept drinks from strangers, and be wary of what signals they send because not all people understand consent.
Why the interest in victim blaming and no mention of "don't rape people"?
>Some feminists
heh
>Why the interest in victim blaming and no mention of "don't rape people"?
I'm so sorry I didn't include every word I might ever say to my hypothetical, non-existent children, and only included examples of what I'd tell them to avoid rape, because that is what is relevant.
And I don't think it's victim blaming to tell your children to be careful. Is it victim blaming to tell them to look both ways before they cross a street when they have the right of way? Sometimes cars ignore red lights; is it insensitive to people who were run over to tell them both to be careful as a pedestrian and to watch for red lights as a driver?
Yeah I mean I guess it would be if it were at all like getting raped. Lots of women just walking down the street getting accidentally raped in your world, I guess.
And let's teach the blacks to not steal while we're at it!
Man, it's so easy to just educate sociopaths into not being sociopaths, why did we not think of doing this earlier?! Perhaps we should also make these heinous acts against some sort of law or something, as well.
Well, stranger rape is the vast minority of rapes, so the "common sense" risk mitigation is pretty much bullshit.
Real risk mitigation would look something like "don't trust your male friends, your male teachers, your brother, your father, your uncle, and especially your boyfriend or husband."
But everyone would throw their hands up and say "misandry" and "paranoia" so rape prevention keeps harping on rapists in bushes and bars instead of our friends, lovers, and family members.
Also, it's not exactly healthy to go around distrusting absolutely everyone of the opposite gender. So yeah.
Uh, you are more likely to get raped by the friend you are going home with then you were to get raped at the party.
Thats the victim blaming there. See, you should be able to get black out drunk at a party. I have got black out drunk at parties and, as a bloke, have only ever once ended up in a situation of sexual assault.
Far more likely for a lady. Thats the victim blaming there man. You chose to get black out drunk, even if you state that puts you at a higher risk to be sexually assaulted it is still not your fault in any way.
His main points are bullshit. That point is bullshit. There were some very, VERY effective anti-rape adverts in the UK. We need to do something about rape culture, we need to do something about the idea that it is unsafe to get black out drunk at a party.
Why is it far more safe for me to get blackout drunk. And it should be safe for anyone. If you teach people to mitigate risk the only way ladies can mitigate that risk is to never have a boyfriend, never have a girlfriend and to leave their family the moment they can walk and go and live in a locked box.
tldr:
You cannot protect yourself and should not be asked to in this situation. Trying to say that women should protect themselves from these situations does, to a degree, blame them. Say they could have avoided it "If" they did something else puts some blame on them.
Sexual assault should be condemned. No victims should ever be blamed, no responsibility should be laid at their feet.
Why not do both? Why wouldn't you give someone information on how to avoid potentially shitty situations? Its called living in the real world where there are shitty people, as opposed to being angry we don't live in dreamland and pretending that simply educating is going to stop all shitty behavior.
Not telling someone that they can get raped by getting blacked out drunk at a party, isnt going to prevent that from happening. Until we live in a magical rape free world, why not educate people on dangers they will face? We aren't victim blaming kids for getting hit by cars by telling them not to play in the street or to look both ways before crossing.
One of the problems I have with the "teach people not to get raped" is that women have been taught to be cautious for years. We are taught that before we even hit puberty.
If you take the Stubenville example, you could say that the victim was being reasonably cautious. She was a teenager who wanted to get drunk, like most teenagers do. She did it at a house party with friends and people she'd gone to school with for years. The guys who raped her weren't strangers at all. I went to high school with people I'd known since the age of 7, I would never believe any of them could hurt me. What is the lesson here? Never trust any man ever when you are drunk, even if you've known him most of your life? Never go anywhere if you are drunk, even if you are with a group of friends?
Common sense is important, but sometimes the risk of rape isn't readily apparent. Which is why people (not just men, everyone) should be taught not to rape.
I don't disagree. Teaching people how to be careful doesnt mean that horrible shit still won't happen.
And when we express that we're cautious, we get told to stop being such paranoid, uptight man-haters. Otherwise everyone who's all about teaching "precautions" would be cool with Schrodinger's Rapist
>See, you should be able to get black out drunk at a party.
Am I the only one not seeing how your freedom to get black out drunk at a party is an inalienable right we need to stand up for?! Getting black out drunk is irresponsible, its dangerous (if only to your health), and its damaging to society. I love me some alcoholic beverages, but getting black out drunk in and of itself is not a good thing!
please note this is in no way addressing whether the person who does get black out drunk should be raped cause I think we can all agree they shouldn't
I think it's funny that you assumed my message was directed only at women.
I also stopped reading your post when you mentioned Rape Culture
But to address your first point, yes most rapes happen from people the victim knows, but this still does not mean that an individual cannot take steps to help protect themselves. As I said before, it is NEVER the victims fault.
(See how I completely did not blame the victim and you chose to ignore it?)
You can say it is never the victim's fault all you like, but then you are saying things that the victim is responsible for. Avoiding certain people, etc. You are being PC and avoiding the ramifications of your language. If the woman (or man) can do anything to avoid being raped, then rape is by definition partially her (or his) fault. Which is a dangerous, dangerous mentality.
I never ever used those words, please stop twisting them.
I never said that the victims were responsible for anything. I simply stated that there are steps that ANYONE can take to mitigate risk against themselves. By sticking close to your most trusted friends at parties, by not getting black out drunk, by working on a buddy system, by not walking alone down dark alleys, etc.
This applies to all risks, not just rape. Mugging, murder, etc, There are always things you can do to help protect yourself.
You may want to make the leap of logic that just because someone didn't take the steps to protect themselves that they are instantly to blame for their plight, but you are alone in this.
Do you blame a murder victim for not having a weapon on themselves in order to protect them? NO, but it is an undeniable fact that they might have survived had they had one.
Stop equating risk prevention with victim blaming, they are nowhere near the same thing.
I understand what you are getting at, all I'm saying is it's a slippery slope. We should teach everyone about rape and what it is, and we should hope that people show common sense in protecting themselves. Also, chill out.
I'm not sure that's any more 'victim blaming' than saying 'you should close your windows when leaving the house'. Or would you see both of those as victim blaming?
It isn't victim blaming to tell someone "you probably shouldn't go to a party where you don't know anyone alone and get blackout drunk".
The same way I would tell someone "you shouldn't wave around a diamond encrusted Rolex while walking down a dark alley". I'm not blaming this guy for getting mugged if he does get mugged, it's just common sense as a survival instinct to not put yourself in dangerous situations.
Also, someone equating OP's advice to "lock yourself in a box" is just a ridiculous strawman.