Misogyny, Guns, Rape and Culture..

[Kittamaru]

Bells and her ideological soul mates unreasonably believe that women have a reasonable expectation not be raped in a society that is functionally incapable of restraining all men who are inclined to rape. In light of this reality, it becomes unreasonable not to advise women to attempt to mitigate the threat of rape by whatever reasonable means at their disposal.

So... you believe that it is unreasonable to expect men and women to behave like rational, sapient beings... that it is unreasonable to expect men and women to curb their more primal urges and approach the subject of sex with at least a modicum of tact and civility? You believe it is unreasonable to EXPECT men and women to have even ONE IOTA of respect for those around them?

Interesting... this information is... well, simply terrifying.

It is also telling that you and your ideological neighbors focus ENTIRELY on the subject of a man committing the act of rape... what of the men who have been raped by women? Or women that have been raped by other women?

 

[wellwisher]

Men and women look at the world differently. The male mind thinks in terms of cause and effect. Even the predator male stalking a victim, plans with cause and effect, so he can better target his victim. He may be motivated by some irrational concern of impulse, but once the plan is in action, a rational mind deals with the plan. If the entire event was irrational, rapist would be easy to spot and catch, due to irrational mistakes.

When men give advice to women, how to better deal within the cause and effect of rape and rapist, they do this to help women better deal with a predator, who will ultimately use rational triggers and plans. If I say the way a women dresses will have an impact on the cause and effect within males, this is to point out how males think and therefore how predator males also think in terms of triggers. A rapist can be fully functional in all other areas. He is not brain dead but a scum bag with a rational plan.

The women appear to think in a different way, and can't see how such concerns should matter. Since it does not matter to them they think men think this way. Dress to them is about a different motivation like style. But since the goal is to reduce rape, women need to think more like men to avoid setting themselves up for failure among predators. The fire will burn even if you wish not to be so.

I get the impression that too many women think men need to accommodate the women by changing their nature. Although many men try to do this, predators will not just say, yes dear and accept female irrationality over their logic triggers. One could argue the violence is fighting against accommodation even if not implied.

The same would be true if single guys were giving advice to a married guy. They would say that he should not let himself be whipped into accommodation. This advice will not work, in marriage, since the easier path is to accommodate irrationality and insecurity; let the queen bee lead.

In the case of rape, females need to accommodate rational advice, and not listen to the female advice based on the assumption you should always get your way regardless of male cause and effect. The rapists are not whipped. He will use cause and effect triggers and strategies. Getting drunk is not good, especially if alcohol brings out a looser gal. That is a trigger. Weakness, not appearing to belong, and being alone are also triggers. Not appearing to belong can mean being overdressed for a dive bar. Even women bullying another female, sets her up for consoling.

 

[pjdude1219]

Bells and her ideological soul mates unreasonably believe that women have a reasonable expectation not be raped in a society that is functionally incapable of restraining all men who are inclined to rape.

they do everyone in a civilizied society has the very reasonable expectation of not having crimes committed against them. its really very simple. either the onus is on men not to rape and women have the right to be. or as you apartently believe the onus is on women not to be raped and they have to follow the "rules.

In light of this reality, it becomes unreasonable not to advise women to attempt to mitigate the threat of rape by whatever reasonable means at their disposal.

again its not about talking about rape prevention even though the techniques are useless cause the only counter stranger rape which is like what 10 or 15%. it about the constant bringing it up in the context of actual rapes essentialy telling the victim they wanted it. it also complete ignore male victims of sexual assualt. so piss misogyny we are under zero obligation to accept it

 

[Kittamaru]

wellwisher, the problem is you are trying to apply a rational explanation to an irrational problem; I would hardly call someone who willfully and willingly breaks the law, endangers anothers life, strips someone of their rights and privacy, violates anothers body, and aggressively attacks someone to get sexual gratification, a rational person.

 

[iceaura]

American society mandates that women become pregnant? And that once they do, must remain so?

No. Although Texas is trying its best (likewise with the slavery it regrets losing) . So? The point was in reference to your analogy, not American society.

So the woman lives because the community is too corrupt to protect itself from disorder.

Holy fuck. That's your idea of "corruption" - not stoning adulterous women to death because everyone is at risk of such temptation?

‘Nor am I without sins,’ he says to the people, ‘but if we allow only perfect people to enforce the law, the law will soon be dead – and our city with it.’
So the woman died because her community was too rigid to endure her deviance.

No, obviously misinterpreted. The community was clearly ready to endure her deviance. The rigid little bastard was the rabbi.

Bells and her ideological soul mates unreasonably believe that women have a reasonable expectation not be raped in a society that is functionally incapable of restraining all men who are inclined to rape.

No. We think women have a "reasonable expectation" not to be raped by members of their society in a society obviously capable of reducing that risk to a "reasonable" level. And by "obviously" is meant that it has been done, in places and among subgroups and even in entire societies, so it can be. One's risk of rape varies enormously, by rate and by kind, according to one's community and circumstances on this planet. So it can be reduced, especially if high, without apparent lower bound, by addressing issues of community and circumstance. Reasonably.

Also, we think that there is no excuse for failing to do this in a community of prosperous and educated people , with means, when the risk is as unreasonably high as it is in the US currently.

Have you ever picked up a kitten by the scruff of the neck? Absolute, instant acquiescence. It's fascinating.
Men can be turned into complete fools at the sight of a pretty face. But I've seen women react in exactly the same way.

Which is cause for hope, and guidance for method. We know, for example, that the expression of such mental reflexes in humans is culturally mediated - paranoid schizophrenics in Western societies very often fixate on Jews, in the US on black or white or female people; obsessive compulsive disorders will focus on hand washing in some places, tooth brushing in others. "Complete fool" and "rapist" are separable categories. The point is that US society's tendency of some forms of mental haywire to express as hatred for women or a woman, a major predisposition for sexual assault and murder in the US, is apparently mutable - not a human inevitability.

 

[Trooper]

Which advice should women listen to again? The one that completely disregards the psychology of rapists and individuals in general and go balls to the walls fighting back because you believe the worst thing that can happen at that point is to be raped?

No. It isn't safe to assume he’s a sadistic rapist. How do you know a sadistic rapist from a sadistic killer?

 

[Trooper]

We have Nietzsche expressing the ideal of Joy in response to a world which cannot make sense, but.... he is asking something of us as difficult to truly believe as feeling a belief in God.

I can. Just as long as I don't remember that this is something I'm being asked to do. As long as I don't remember that it is only Panadol.

I always remember. Always. That this belief is not necessarily mine.

A struggle against evolutionary strands, the cycle from animal to God—God to animal. Why should our desire for eternal recurrence be any different? Everything waxes and wanes, doesn’t it?

Men can be turned into complete fools at the sight of a pretty face.

This is what I don’t understand, the drive, not that we’re without, but less, no?

You know what it is? He’d never admit, may not even know it. His desire is a sin. Not sex in general, not desire in other people, HIS. But he endows me with this authority to absolve him. If I crave him, he regains his innocence. Then he is at peace with himself, on good terms with god. I have restored him to grace. And that’s what makes his desire so driven and compulsive. If it were just glands and hormones it would be simple, like in animals. Would come and go, would be simply one part of life. It’s not like that for him. Glands and hormones have been drafted for his scheme in salvation. They work overtime, day and night. It’s not carnal at all but metaphysical. Salvation for a sinner like him is a never ending task.—The Listener

Born out of sin; does it add to the enthusiasm? Sometimes, I think so. Coaxing reassurance is an art. Is it acceptance that men seek, hierarchy, or simply a release from the thoughts that consume them?

Is my ignorance an embarrassment?

“The man is for woman a means: the end is always the child.”

If I’m to assume that men are childish, a warrior for playthings, is the child then, a plaything, too? Or am I to assume that they have no desires for a child, or empathy towards it? How dare I.

Do you think "weak" was the right word to use, there?

Then my submission would be a sign of weakness, would it not? If avoided, nothing would ever happen, our names blotted out of the book of the living.

What we give does not address the thieves, though. Am I wrong, Marquis, to agree with Samantha Levine?

“I’m more than a little uncomfortable with how the horrifying murder of six people (including four men) – in the name of a hatred of women – has essentially been co-opted as an airing of grievances against men.”—Samantha Levine

Am I naive to say that not all men are thieves or inherently evil? Is it your duty, a display that keeps you from evil or that your own interests will be best served if you take into account the interests of others? The propensity to be misogynistic, is that where the problem lies?

I haven’t seen "Tigerland", but I will. I did see "Belle", though. The trial was about objects and money. The evidence and depictions forced us to relate, diminishing the "us vs. them" mentality. The Zong massacre influenced the abolishment. In the painting, her cousin's hand lies gently upon Dido's arm, suggesting affection and equality rather than a subordinate status. A chick flick, I suppose, but I enjoyed it, nonetheless. "The Flowers of War" was good, too.

 

[iceaura]

No. It isn't safe to assume he’s a sadistic rapist.

It isn't safe to assume anything, make any judgment, adopt any tactic, do anything at all. It isn't safe, to be assaulted. One does the best one can under the circumstances, and accrues no blame for any consequence whatsoever.

Safety lies in prevention. Prevention lies in modifying the behavior of potential rapists.

Born out of sin; does it add to the enthusiasm?

Probably a cultural pathology. Teach a hundred children that sex is dirty, you'll teach at least one that dirt is sexy.

Am I naive to say that not all men are thieves or inherently evil?

Not wrong, just irrelevant. Not all men are anything, except maybe carriers of Y chromosomes.

 

[tali89]

One would hope that blaming women for being raped would be repugnant to all sensibilities.

You don't find the thought of blaming women for being raped "repugnant to your sensibilities"?

It isn't a fear that it may happen, because it already does happen. Had you read this thread, you'd have discovered that already.

So you want to withhold information that may reduce a woman's risk of being raped, simply because some people may come to conclusion you find repugnant? What's more important to you, Bells: Protecting women from rape, or ensuring that people don't hold beliefs contrary to your own?

 

[tali89]

Safety lies in prevention. Prevention lies in modifying the behavior of potential rapists.

Something which most women, as individuals, are powerless to change. It's irresponsible of you to tell women not to take measures to protect themselves, and instead rely on things outside of their control to protect them. If you want to disempower women by removing their sense of autonomy, that's your business, but don't go shouting down other people who simply want to empower women.

 

[Kittamaru]

Something which most women, as individuals, are powerless to change. It's irresponsible of you to tell women not to take measures to protect themselves, and instead rely on things outside of their control to protect them. If you want to disempower women by removing their sense of autonomy, that's your business, but don't go shouting down other people who simply want to empower women.

Okay then tali89...

Tell me; how should a woman protect herself from a rapist? Now, i'm talking at the point at which she has been chosen as the target and it is simply a matter of time before the rapist makes his or her move (of course, the victim-to-be is unaware of this, as they are not psychic and cannot read the perpetrators thoughts); how should the person:

A) Determine they are at risk of being raped
B) Determine WHO is going to rape them
C) Prevent this from occurring
D) Failing C, fight back

 

[tali89]

It's not really my place to say. The suggestions you made came out of your mouth, not mine. I don't go around dictating how other people should behave. However, it's irresponsible to withhold factual information that could be used to risk of rape from women, out of concern that it might be misconstrued by some individuals. Wouldn't you agree?

 

[Bells]

So you want to withhold information that may reduce a woman's risk of being raped, simply because some people may come to conclusion you find repugnant? What's more important to you, Bells: Protecting women from rape, or ensuring that people don't hold beliefs contrary to your own?

Where did I say that I would withhold information from women?

I actually said the opposite.

So I'd suggest you stop trolling. This is like the 3rd time I have seen you completely misrepresent what people are saying in this thread.

 

[tali89]

Where did I say that I would withhold information from women?

I actually said the opposite.

Where did you say the opposite? From what I've seen, you've acted with outrage whenever a poster so much as suggests that a woman might be able to reduce her risk of rape by adopting certain preventative measures. So, you're OK with providing women with information on how to adjust their behaviours in order to reduce their risk of being raped, but you'll condemn such an action as rape apologism in the same breath. Huh? Do you actually have a consistent worldview, or do you just antagonise others for the fun of it?

 

[Kittamaru]

It's not really my place to say. The suggestions you made came out of your mouth, not mine. I don't go around dictating how other people should behave. However, it's irresponsible to withhold factual information that could be used to risk of rape from women, out of concern that it might be misconstrued by some individuals. Wouldn't you agree?

That depends, especially on the presentation - trying to "educate" a person on things that should be common sense for any semi-reasonable individual can very easily come across as condescending... the fact that you are unwilling (or unable) to provide any such methods of prevention or risk mitigation speaks volumes...

I also demand some proof that Bells is advocating that women should not use any sort of preventative measures... from the onset, what Bells has been fighting tooth and nail against is BLAMING the victim by saying they "coulda woulda shoulda" done something differently. Providing information that could potentially help a person avoid being raped is excellent (though I have yet to see any actual advice being offered up that isn't simple common sense thus far)... however, if you use such information to CONDEMN the victim (for not having supposedly followed it) after they have been raped is simply deplorable.

 

[Trooper]

RAINN recommends a three-tiered approach when it comes to preventing sexual violence
on college campuses. A prevention campaign should include the following elements:

1. Bystander intervention education: empowering community members to act in
response to acts of sexual violence.
2. Risk-reduction messaging: empowering members of the community to take steps
to increase their personal safety.
3. General education to promote understanding of the law, particularly as it relates
to the ability to consent.

You may note that we have not used the term “primary prevention,” which is widely used
in the field. That is because we have a different definition of primary prevention than many.
We believe that the most effective — the primary — way to prevent sexual violence is to
use the criminal justice system to take more rapists off the streets. Stopping a rapist early in
his or her career can prevent countless future rapes. Because increasing reporting and
vigorous prosecution are better addressed in the context of response to sexual assault, we
discuss this further in the crime section below. This approach should, of course, continue to
be complemented by education and outreach campaigns targeted towards younger, more
malleable populations.

Remind me again, why you didn't find RAINN's suggestions helpful, Kitt?

https://rainn.org/images/03-2014/WH-Task-Force-RAINN-Recommendations.pdf

 

[cluelusshusbund]

I wonder... if women (on average) was as strong as men... woud they atempt to rape men as often as men atempt to rape women... or are women (on average) just morally beter than men.???

 

[tali89]

That depends, especially on the presentation - trying to "educate" a person on things that should be common sense for any semi-reasonable individual can very easily come across as condescending... the fact that you are unwilling (or unable) to provide any such methods of prevention or risk mitigation speaks volumes...

I also demand some proof that Bells is advocating that women should not use any sort of preventative measures... from the onset, what Bells has been fighting tooth and nail against is BLAMING the victim by saying they "coulda woulda shoulda" done something differently. Providing information that could potentially help a person avoid being raped is excellent (though I have yet to see any actual advice being offered up that isn't simple common sense thus far)... however, if you use such information to CONDEMN the victim (for not having supposedly followed it) after they have been raped is simply deplorable.

Kittamaru, I'm sure that Bells is more than capable of elaborating on her position. There is no need for you to behave as her kabana girl.

As for your concern about rape prevention measures being perceived as condescending, my only reply is, "So what?" Are you going to deny women the facts because you want them to be protected from 'condescension'? Do you think women are such delicate flowers that they need to be protected from 'hurt feelings'?

 

[Bells]

I wonder... if women (on average) was as strong as men... woud they atempt to rape men as often as men atempt to rape women... or are women (on average) just morally beter than men.???

Male rape victim's often do not speak out because of the belief that women are weaker, etc and that they are thus weak because they allowed themselves to be raped. One of the biggest issues facing male rape victims is that they feel too ashamed to report it, or that others will not believe them or even think it is rape.

It doesn't require strength. There is this mistaken belief that all rapists are like the ones who jump out at you or pull you into an alleyway to brutalise you. Your average rapist, be they male or female, is more than likely to be someone you know and already intimate with. I'll put it into some perspective. A male acquaintance of mine once started complaining that his wife always wanted sex. When he wasn't interested, she would get under the covers and fellate him even after he said "no". She never gave him the choice. He would try to roll over, she would climb on top of him and rape him. When he tried to complain about this to his male friends, they all congratulated him. When the rest of us told him that it was rape, they all scoffed when we were appalled. Because rape isn't "that". Rape is when some person forces you to have sex against your will to some people. Apparently he wasn't being raped repeatedly by his wife because this was something he should have been enjoying and because he would get an erection, to them, it wasn't rape. Now apply those standards to a woman who says no to her husband and he continues to manipulate her genitals and then enters her either with his penis or with his fingers or an object even after she has said no, and he keeps going until she climaxes. To a lot of people, that isn't rape. That is rape.

Manipulation, verbal force, threats and coercion all factor in for rape. The problem with a lot of rape prevention ideology is that it prepares women to deal with stranger rape and that's great, because dealing with stranger rape falls under the umbrella of self defense against attackers, for example. But it does not prepare women for how to react or deal with the people who are more than likely to rape them and it also does not educate women on the fact that their intimate partner is more than likely to rape them than a complete stranger.

But worst of all, it completely leaves out male rape victims from that equation. Men don't get training or self defense courses on how to know what to do if you are being attacked or raped. Good self defense courses educate women on how to know and understand the psychology of their attacker or rapist and what to do in each situation. It's not just about using your keys as a weapon and screaming "no" in their faces, for example. It's about understanding and knowing what to do and when it is safe to take such measures. Men do not get those options.

It is why I ask people who advocate rape prevention if they go to sleep with their running shoes on and running clothes on, and if they do not ever drink in the presence of their partner or spouse or male relative. Because the real big danger that rape prevention ideology does not educate men or women on, is how to respond and deal with the people who is more than likely going to be your rapist.

 

[Bells]

Where did you say the opposite? From what I've seen, you've acted with outrage whenever a poster so much as suggests that a woman might be able to reduce her risk of rape by adopting certain preventative measures. So, you're OK with providing women with information on how to adjust their behaviours in order to reduce their risk of being raped, but you'll condemn such an action as rape apologism in the same breath. Huh? Do you actually have a consistent worldview, or do you just antagonise others for the fun of it?

Last time I am going to tell you. Stop trolling. I have given my opinion on this issue more than enough times in this thread that your repeatedly asking me the same question and refusing to read the responses and falsely attributing things to me is tantamount to trolling.

You are supposedly "new" here, so this is the one chance you are going to get.

At no time have I ever said that women should not be "given all the information". On the absolute contrary. I have repeatedly said that women are not stupid and are more than capable of making their own decisions about their own safety without twats on the internet, the media or elsewhere having to remind them of their so called duties about "rape prevention". I have also repeatedly explained my problems with rape prevention ideology because it often leads to women being reminded by said twats on the internet, media or elsewhere that they are to blame for being raped for failing to adhere to certain forms of conduct that said twats on the internet, media or elsewhere believe women should be adhering to because of how they view women in general. I have also repeatedly stated that people who espouse rape prevention ideology also fail to factor in that women are more than likely going to be raped by people they know, trust and are usually intimate with. I have also repeatedly and clearly stated that the belief that women have to abide by set rules defined differently by various twats on the internet, the media or elsewhere about their behaviour under the guise of rape prevention and carry on as if women who fail to behave in a set standard way because of how others personally believe women should be acting often results in women's freedoms and rights being infringed upon. I have also repeatedly commented on the fact that rape prevention ideology only applies to women and not men. And this isn't even touching on the fact that rape prevention ideology, by design, places the onus on women to not be raped, instead of on the rapist to not rape.

You would have discovered this if you had actually read my responses.

I do hope I have made myself clear enough for you now? Or do you need pictures and smaller words?