The (Quiet) Feminist Revolution


Joanna Schroeder advocates both individual responsibility and an understanding of the realities of the society we live in.

Winter in West Michigan can be dreadful. Snow falls almost continuously due to “Lake Effect”, and as you can imagine, it’s really flippin’ cold. It was one of those days: grey, bitter cold, and dumping snow. My father and I were driving on a rural road. A rusty pickup truck squealed to the side of the road in front of us, and out jumped a young woman holding a baby in a snowsuit. There were no houses in sight and a storm was coming in. The pickup squealed off, its tires spinning and spitting snow into the air in front of us.

My father and I looked at each other. I was about fourteen. He turned to me and said, “We’re going to ask that lady if she needs a ride (there were no cell phones at this time, of course), but I want you to ask her so she’s not scared.” I understood.

We pulled up, I asked her, and she replied, “Aww no, honey, thanks. He’ll be back.” She smiled at me, but her face was puffy and streaked with tears. We drove away, but we looped back around to be sure she was fine, and of course she was climbing back into that truck just a few minutes later. My father pulled the car over after the truck was gone and explained to me why he had me ask the lady if she wanted help. He said he would’ve offered help regardless, but she’d be more likely to take it from a man with a female in the car. He also said that I shouldn’t get in a car with a man I didn’t know. I already knew that, of course.

♦◊♦

Last week, after holiday shopping on the crazy-busy Third Street Promenade in Santa Monica, I went for lunch alone at Tender Greens. This restaurant is set up cafeteria-style, where the majority of the seating is at a bunch of long tables. While in line, a nice guy said something to me like, “Isn’t this restaurant cool?” and we chatted a bit about how awesome it is that restaurants focusing on local goods are sprouting up.

I took my tray and sat down, and after he paid, he sat down by me at one of these long tables. Not directly across, but diagonal. We ate quietly for a bit, but eventually got into a really interesting conversation about the music his record label makes and how he chooses to run his label in a socially-responsible manner. I talked to him about the GMP and solicited him to submit an article about an album that a tough-guy singer is about to release that focuses around the pain of having been bullied when he was younger. We shared emails on our phones and were off on our separate ways.

♦◊♦

So why did I tell you these two relatively uneventful stories? Because I’m trying to pull together both sides of this debate about the Presumption of Male Guilt (a special section of GMP I recently co-led), and say that Hugo Schwyzer is right… and so is Lisa Hickey.

In a recent Twitter debate between a bunch of people, including Tom Matlack, Hugo Schwyzer, and two well-respected feminists, Jennifer Pozner and Amanda Marcotte, Hugo asked Tom “your daughter has a choice: she can accept a ride from a strange woman or strange man. Do you care? What advice do you give?” to which Tom replied, “I would not tell her to base it on gender. Don’t get in cars with strangers period…” I think this is foolish, stubborn advice based in a theoretical argument rather than reality. There are times in which we need help, we all need help, and though Lisa is so right when she says, “The best way to overcome fear is to gain competence” in her piece, When Women Fear Men, that is not always an option.

I flashed back to what my father taught me both with his words and his actions that day on the side of that country road in a snow storm. Sometimes we have to ask for help, Tom, and sometimes there are only strangers around. There may be a violent-looking woman and a very kind-looking man to choose from, and in that case your daughter should defy gender stereotypes. She should follow her instincts. But in general, your daughter should play the numbers and know that if she is going to be raped or murdered, it is most likely going to be by a man and make a choice based upon that.

My father, without naming it, understood that in Rape Culture, he was presumed guilty despite being completely well-intended. He was willing to shoulder that burden and wasn’t angry about not being innately trusted.

♦◊♦

I think what is misunderstood about Hugo’s message in In Rape Culture, All Men Are Guilty Until Proven Innocent, is that in recognizing the reality of a world in which women are (in general) physically weaker and the police and courts systems are (in general) dominated by men, you do not have to feel guilty. You do not need to feel bad about yourself because of what other men have done. There is a difference between Feminists trying to make you feel bad about being a man (which is dead wrong) and us asking you to recognize the way most women feel, and asking you to respect that.

Hugo, it seems to me, is calling men forth to demand more from one another. Sure, you shouldn’t have to do this, but this is the way society changes. As a feminist, I ask women to stop doing the things that damage society and ourselves. Yes, we are complicit too. It isn’t about self-hate, it’s about taking responsibility. The woman in that pickup was probably in an abusive relationship (whether it was him abusing her, or them abusing one another) and she needed to take responsibility for being there and needed to change her life, especially for her baby. That’s her job. Resources are available, and it’s our job, as a society, to offer those resources. We all have responsibility here, and feeling guilty (on a micro level) is merely going to cripple our ability to make change (on a macro level).

♦◊♦

To Lisa’s point, in her rebuttal Rapists, I have Known, “Presuming guilt in males is not good for males and it is not good for females”, being suspicious of men does harm all of us in a day-to-day way. When I was in line at Tender Greens, I could’ve assumed this guy, Jacob, was a perv or a creep or only out to sleep with me. But on a micro level, on a personal level, I had a strong feeling he wasn’t. I trust my feelings. Even if he had a sliver of intention to hook up with me, all I had to do was say “no” (I’m married). We were in a restaurant in a bustling city and I am an intelligent and resourceful woman.

I assumed the best about Jacob, and I was rewarded by meeting a nice person who regarded me as a human being and a professional. Maybe someday he’ll become a contributor to The Good Men Project and he will show us yet another way in which men are good. Am I defying what Hugo says about Rape Culture in doing what Lisa says we should do (not pre-judge men, become competent myself)? Am I denying Rape Culture by trusting a man, any man? No, Rape Culture is real and Good Men are real.

I don’t intend to speak for this relative stranger, Jacob, in saying that he took responsibility for Rape Culture in his short interaction with me last week. But in my mind, he did. He spoke to me as an equal, he did not step into my personal space, he did not mention anything about my physical appearance, he didn’t touch me or follow me, or ask for my number (I volunteered my email after talking about contributing to GMP someday). I don’t think he treated me like I was a man—I think he treated me like I am a human. And, if I may speak for women for just a moment, that is what we want.

I think this is something most of you guys do every day. As Hugo maintains, “Good guys hold themselves and other men accountable, in public and in private.” Good guys act how Jacob acted, and they hold other men accountable to act the same. Those simple behaviors are the start of a revolution.

 

Sponsored Content

Premium Membership, The Good Men Project

About Joanna Schroeder

Joanna Schroeder is the type of working mom who opens her car door and junk spills out all over the ground. She serves as Executive Editor of The Good Men Project and is a freelance writer whose work has appeared on sites like xoJane, hlntv.com, and The Huffington Post. Joanna loves playing with her sons, skateboarding with her husband, and hanging out with friends. Her dream is to someday finish her almost-done novel and get some sleep. Follow her shenanigans on Twitter.

Comments

  1. Thank you Joanna.

  2. It unrealistic to set a standard for an entire group, fulled with people who’s life you know nothing about.

    That goes for woman and men.

    It’s unreasonable to tell someone to be accountable for someone else, let alone a total stranger.
    You can have your opinion about the way a man lives his life, but unless he wants to change and is seeking your help it’s all for nothing.

  3. Tom Matlack says:

    Joanna a very well articulated piece. I don’t necessarily agree with everything here but I feel like I learned something by reading this and understand your POV better. I honestly wouldn’t want my daughter to get in a car with a stranger. And yet I am sure there are times when she needs help and she would need to make a judgement. Should she more scared of a black man than a white one? Based on numbers I suppose she probably should be, but I’m enough of an idealist to not want to act on that because I actually think she could tell more by looking at what kind of individual she was dealing with than the gender or skin color of the stranger, just like Jacob did with you–as stranger but a nice one, despite being a man. That doesn’t discount in any way what you express in terms of what it is like to be a women in a world where rape etc does happen too often. I do think the language around male guilt has gotten screwed up and perhaps we are all agreeing but just not finding the right way to talk about it. Hopefully this piece helps clarify some of that, as was my attempt in mine.

    • Julie Gillis says:

      See my piece below, Tom. I think one way we deal with the fear of “not knowing who the monster is” is by creating categories for trust. We do this with race, gender, class etc. We manage the anxiety of not being able to see into another’s intentions by lumping groups of people together.

      “A white lady in a suit will be safer than that hispanic lady with no shoes.”
      A black lady with kids will be safer than a white man traveling alone.”

      How do we know that? We don’t. That white lady in a suit might be responsible for some horrible corporate oil spill that killed the gulf. That hispanic lady might help you and treat you to a home cooked meal. We have NO idea.

      We hedge our bets and we do it awkwardly. We claim stats and numbers to justify our choices.

      We also filter our own experiences and create nano second judgements based on unconscious things.

      What if you had an amazingly kind piano teacher that looks like the man at the gas station. What if you also see an Asian older woman who reminds you of something in your past that was not so pleasant. Do you know you are filtering those thoughts? You don’t know which person is the kind/safe one.

      (in statistical likelihood they both probably are the kind/safe one).

      Gift of Fear was a great book that broke down a lot of the micro-second information that people manage all the time. There could be, and should be a Gift of Trust book too maybe.

      I see, in all of these discussions, so much anxiety that I wonder if it isn’t coming up, burbling to the surface from a deeper well. I’m not sure what that is, but I do know it feels really painful to watch, it must be painful to experience (as the arguments attest), and I’m not sure how to make things better.

      I do appreciate this article Joanna. Thanks.

  4. Lisa Hickey says:

    Hey Joanna,

    Thanks for such a thought-provoking piece. In both of the stories you tell, I can imagine myself in just those situations you describe.

    I want to start by answering this — which to me connects the stories and issues you choose to tell here:

    “your daughter has a choice: she can accept a ride from a strange woman or strange man. Do you care? What advice do you give?”

    My advice to my kids starts with the bigger areas of 1) always be aware of your surroundings 2) know the escape routes 3) don’t panic 4) Think twice before getting into any situation you can’t get out of.

    And – I am with Tom – I would say “don’t get into cars with strangers, period.” I honestly can’t see the benefit to giving my children guidance that they should be more fearful of men than of women. They seem to be able to pick that up just fine without me.

    I really would rather teach my kids skills for self-competence. Often it’s more about thinking through to the future – get a good job so you can buy a car that doesn’t break down. Keep it maintained. Make sure your phone battery is fully charged – especially on long road trips. Always tell someone where you’re going. Don’t drink, or be super responsible when you do – drinking impairs your judgment, you might be drunk AND stranded somewhere without a ride. In other words — *Create a life for yourself where you probably won’t have to worry about getting in cars with strangers.*

    I just have a really hard time with “make sure you have enough gas, don’t forget to charge your phone, and oh, be careful not to get raped.” I know no one overtly says those things, but it seems to me that’s the intention.

    I am honestly trying to understand the benefits to teaching my children to be more cautious around men rather than teaching them a whole host of other things they might learn to survive and thrive.

    But here’s the other piece of this that’s interesting to me Joanna. What you do with SheSaidHeSaid – your column on sex and relationships – THAT does it for me. That talks about – well, sex and relationships. So it talks about all of the ways to navigate through the complexities, gives a view of sex through both sides of the male and female experience, and lets people know that it is important and good to talk about the difficult issues.

    And what that brings up is that really – when teaching – be as specific as possible. Not just what to be afraid of, but what to do in a whole variety of situations you might find yourself in. That’s what is so powerful about shared storytelling.

    This long comment – sorry, it should have been a post! — does not negate the joy I got from reading your stories, thinking them through, and forming conclusions in my mind about what is the appropriate way to respond.

    • Lisa, I agree with you almost completely about specifics and being prepared. I don’t know what it’s like to have a daughter, I really don’t, but the way my fathers raised me (father and stepfather) was to be exactly as you teach your children to be. Prepared, confident, competent, and they both actually taught me to be ferocious. Maybe a little too much (someday I’ll tell the story of how I ended up with a restraining order against a paparazzo).

      Of course I tell my kids not to get into cars with anyone, ever, aside from the three people who pick them up from school. I prepare them for danger, we even practice stranger danger just as we practice what to do when we encounter rattlesnakes or coyotes (hello, Southern California). But I’ll be honest: I tell my kids that if they ever cannot find me or someone they know, they are to find a mama with kids and ask her for help. I know that can be seen as sexist, but I’m purely playing odds here. I tell them the second safest person is a daddy with kids.

      Izz got lost at the zoo once and ran through the crowd until he found a family (mom, dad, kids, grandparents) and showed them where I’d written my phone number on his arm. I was on his tail, I could see him twenty feet ahead of me in the crowd, so I saw the whole thing while running to try to catch him. Perhaps I should’ve said “family with kids” but I guess he knew what I meant. I don’t regret this choice in language, but as my kids become teens I like the idea of what you’re saying: Gas, credit card, charged cell phone, warm jacket, AAA card.

      And I’m dealing with boys here, so it’ll all be different for me, but I like what you’re saying, I really do.

      • Lisa Hickey says:

        Ferocious, that’s great! i’d take that as a compliment any day!

        I do have a son, and I do remember that same panic when losing him at an aquarium one day. Argh!

        But I do think I’ll have the conversation with my son (age 24) — and give him the two examples (your father and meeting a stranger in a public place) and seeing what he says he’d do. It will also be interesting to see if he even gets the term “rape culture” — and whether his friends have ever once joked about rape or implied that it was in any way shape or form close to OK. If previous discussions are any indication, he’d be disgusted with the idea. So again — to me — the solution wouldn’t so much rest on trying to get normal “good” guys to step up and hold others accountable — because, from the people I’ve talked to it’s just outside their realm of of experience. But I think addressing the underlying causes — previous abuse, alcohol and drug abuse, mental disorders, social isolation — might be a better path to stoping rapists from raping.

      • Peter Houlihan says:

        Theres a real problem with that: It sends a message that fathers are less trustworthy than mothers. This is prefectly justifiable if only men abduct children, or married men with children were likely abductors, but neither statement is true.

        I won’t tell you how to raise your kids, and I don’t have any of my own (yet). But if and when I do I’ll tell them to keep away from strange adults and to look for uniforms if they get lost (police, security, nurses etc.) followed by families.

        • Joanna Schroeder says:

          Purely anecdotal – my husband and I don’t tell them about uniforms (aside from firefighters) because my husband had a dear female friend when he was young who left his house in a very safe neighborhood to walk home. She was raped and murdered by a security guard whose uniform looked almost exactly like a police officer (including gun).

          The screening that security guards go through is almost nothing, and their training is also almost nothing. A mother or father with kids, to us, is a much safer bet.

          As I said, I’d be willing to accept that “a family with kids” is probably a better choice. That’s what he chose anyway.

          • Peter Houlihan says:

            Good god how awful! I thought of security guards on the basis that they’re usually in charge of the PA, plus thats where I’d bring a lost kid if I came across one, or look for one if my kid were missing (god forbid). Maybe I’ll think twice about that.

      • If you have boys then I’ll ask you to read the CDC stats showing they’re highly at risk of sexual abuse, even by females (very high risk of rape even if you count forced to penetrate as rape). Their risk of physical abuse is also very high, depending on stats you read up to equal levels of domestic abuse, psychological abuse by partners is also a 50:50 split. Then we come to risk of violence in society as a whole, and according to the W.H.O males suffer from violence about 2.2-2.5x more overall.

        But who is safe with our kids? Mothers are the highest rate of child abuse, fathers highest rate of sexual abuse (though mothers making up to 20% according to some stats), there are stats to make every human, afraid of every other human. We can realize that men might be more likely to harm them but we can also realize that most males aren’t harmful, most males will protect that kid from abuse if they can and have the strength apparently to back it up. But alas we judge the many by the few, a we fear men because of a “hyper-fear of men culture”. We’ve grown up hearing the stats, listening to parents justify their prejudice of men because of those stats yet we’re at the point where men are so scared to be around kids that they won’t go and check on them if there is trouble. So who are your boys safer with? From what I remember of stats females were more likely to murder the children, and females more likely to kill boys at that so are they really safer being with a woman vs a man?

        There was a case in the UK I believe of a young girl who went walkabout at daycare, a man saw her but feared what people would do but then she ends up falling into water and drowning I believe and he was unable to help at that point. I realize parents are very afraid for their children but seriously, this society hurts the majority of men because of the minority and we’re facing a generation of kids who will grow up being petrified of men, losing out on normal human interactions, lack male role models in schools because of the fear of abuse. As Peter says, it sends a message that fathers are less trustworthy and when people who advocate against sexism have so much prejudice for men where they are educating their kids to goto WOMEN with kids instead of Any parent….Seriously? Why should men care about sexism against women if they’re so willing to use it and justify it with stats based on the few?

        What many fail to understand is that a culture of fear can cause very real harm, muslims after 911 are a prime example. There are cases of innocents being targetted for vigilant justice because the previous tennant is on the sex offender registry and they didn’t update it. We have fathers who get dirty looks FOR DOING THEIR JOB AS FATHER and spending time with them at parks. But no, we can’t trust the men even though history is full of men who sacrifice their lives protecting everyone else. Military, police, fire services, are primarily full of men but no, men are less trustworthy.

        If the majority of men committed abuse, and the majority of women DIDN’T commit abuse then you might have a cause for concern, but we have stats of abuse from both genders that are at parity for some forms of abuse and even show females more likely to abuse in some cases yet still they are granted automatic trust.

        And parents, ask your daughters about if they joke about rape or even realize men can be raped, the new cdc stats are shocking in how much rape women are doing now and it isn’t as high as the male abusers but it’s still a very huge concern when equal levels of men and women (1.1% or 1.2million Americans for each gender) in the last 12 months were raped pretty much, and the males report 79.2% of their attackers were FEMALE. And of course educate the male children on abuse, educate everyone on abuse and don’t do the typical male attacker female victim scenario only, do ALL of the scenarios.

        It saddens me that I even have to reply to this on a site that has so many fights over sexism and equality, with people who fight for equality and ending sexism. Is it only equality in a pick and choose fashion? Is it only sexism against females that matters? This double standard is what annoys people and quite frankly it seems to be a common theme in feminism, which doesn’t surprise me of why people are hostile towards it. An acceptable prejudice can exist as long as men are the victims it seems, question is WHY? ALL it’s doing is continuing the gender war that funnily enough was a topic a few weeks back, so why is it so important to paint men as less trustworthy as women? It contradicts the desires to get men to drop gender roles if they aren’t allowed the freedom and trust in being a full carer of children without suspicion!

      • Jonna – You said:

        “But I’ll be honest: I tell my kids that if they ever cannot find me or someone they know, they are to find a mama with kids and ask her for help. I know that can be seen as sexist, but I’m purely playing odds here. I tell them the second safest person is a daddy with kids.”

        They are your kids and as a parent you are responsible for teaching them. I do have a concern though, which may not be valid as I don’t know the ages of your children, but it’s that “Told” which is the concern.

        As a child I was told – result = sexual abuse. I have dealt with many people who have had to deal with so many situations and I am always wary of that word Told. It can get in the way at critical moments. It’s a very rigid word that can trap people when they need to react to fluid situations.

        I have seen it used very effectively and It has saved lives. I think of Rick Rescorla who worked at the world trade center as security manager. He told people if they did not feel safe then they were to act. They would not be punished for being wrong. He did not tell people to have limited views, but to have wide views and trust their own instincts. His Told gave people fluidity.

        I also remember a self defense seminar I took some 30 years ago. There was a very interesting point raised. If you are in need of help you never ask a person who can help “Can I Trust You?”. If they have, for want of a better term, evil intent they can breeze over the question very easily. Their intent overrides normal human reaction to the question. They react in the same way that a none dangerous person would. But if you ask them “Are you going to harm me – attack me – abuse me” the none dangerous person will react with shock and even confusion. It also places the relationship on a different power balance. It also allows things such as body language to be reacted to. You use the fluidity of the interpersonal dynamic to see if someone had a rigid intent.

        As I said – I’m not telling you how to raise your kids – but there is a difference between being told and being empowered. P^)

  5. Jasmin Nazarian says:

    Joanna,

    Thanks for this article. I have been reading all the GMP posts on the discussion of Presumption of Male Guilt. And I have tried to comment more than once. But I found myself unable to articulate the many thoughts occurring to me all at once. Your article though seems to capture closest to where my opinion lies: somewhere in the middle. You are so right when you so that rape culture is real and so are good men. I read the articles by Lisa, Hugo, Tom, etc. and agreed a lot and disagreed a little with all of them. Thats why I had such a hard time deciding how to comment!

    I agree with you that it is the responsibility of an entire society (men and women) to fight rape culture. I hope that will be one of the things most people take form this conversion.

    But wherever we land with this discussion, im glad we are having it. Things start to change on the macro level because we discuss things like this together and contemplate our actions and feelings of the day to day.

    It made me a little sad to see that people became so aggressive or angry or accusatory on twitter (people on both sides of the debate) ,especially because as its already been pointed out, the individuals getting aggravated with each other really seemed to agree on most points. But, I can understand it. When you talk about the hard to talk about, it is bound to be personal and people will be passionate and that will manifest in many different ways.

    Still, just thought Id comment on your article because I think this is a great example of how this discussion can be had :)

    • Joanna Schroeder says:

      Thank you so much Jasmin.

      The hard thing about the internet is that we are so detached from one another. When I was reading the Twitter feed, I was reminded of what I know about Tom – which isn’t a whole ton. But one thing I know is that he is the best friend of two men that I know and respect very, very much. I also know that he started this project, the book and the site, and that his heart is very, very good.

      Even when things he said made me wince, I went back to what I know to be true about him. It made me want to sit across from him and buy him a coffee and just take a break, take a breath, and find our common ground and then take small, slow steps from there.

      On the Internet we can’t do that, and we lose sight of one another’s hearts. Mostly because we don’t know the others’ hearts. But that deep breath, that step away from the screen, that moment to collect thoughts — they can still be utilized and can help us say something more effective than our anger leads us to.

  6. According to lots of ‘studies’ and ‘research’ people who pirate music also BUY more music.

  7. (whether it was him abusing her, or them abusing one another)

    Yet why is the presumption that in all cases the guy has to be guilty? Why couldn’t it be she’s the lone abuser in group? That old saw” If she hit him what did he do to deserve it ”

    Almost any guy that’s ever dated / loved a Bi-polar woman has had to learn that.

    • Peter Houlihan says:

      In that particular case, I would imagine it was because she was the one running away (assuming I read it right). If she were the sole abuser it doesn’t seem likely that she’d be trying to get out.

      I agree that the dynamic you’re speaking about (female on male abuse being ignored and covered up) is real and troublesome, but I don’t think this is an instance of it.

      • Ever dated a Bi-polar person? The I hate you I’m getting out / leaving right now……followed by ….Why didn’t you come back / stay drama. In cases like this there is a natural assumption, that doesn’t mean it’s right.

        • Peter Houlihan says:

          Fair point, I take it back, and no I haven’t.

          • Joanna Schroeder says:

            I think that this was probably a mutually abusive situation. I’ve seen a lot of abusive relationships and am pretty good at assessing what’s happening pretty early on. I think a lot more relationships are mutually abusive than we know.

            I feel VERY strongly on the issue of men being abused by women and I know for a fact how often this happens. I mean, I know to the degree that one can know, due to underreporting and lack of research.

            In this case, I feel pretty confident, even in retrospect. Just the body language of terror as opposed to indignation or drama.

  8. ” I think this is foolish, stubborn advice based in a theoretical argument rather than reality”

    Based on what, your bigotry lack of understanding of what the stats. say?

    Women are more likely it abuse children – physically. emotionally and psychologically.

    And professionals on female sexual abuse consider what we know about it to be the tip of the iceberg and believe that most of it remains hidden because of residual religious and patriarchal beliefs about women, and the sort of myths about abuse that feminists preach to society.

  9. “she can accept a ride from a strange woman or strange man. Do you care? What advice do you give?”

    My advice is to accept a ride from neither. Call your mom, me, your grandfather, grandmother, uncles, aunts, cousins, any one of our hundreds of friends who know and love you. In most cases, strangers will help not harm but why place your hope in a stranger when you have far better options. My job as a parent is to ensure my girls have better, safer options than relying on the kindness of strangers should they get into some type of trouble.

    This kind of thing is a life lesson. My girls have seen, and we try to teach them that solving problems is not just a point in time exercise. Having a good relationship with family and creating a large tight circle of friends helps one along when problems arise. As an example, a young lady friend of ours recently had her car break down twice. Within minutes she had several friends there to help her. Because of the way she lives her life, she did not need to depend on the kindness of strangers, as well intended as they might be.

    • Peter Houlihan says:

      But what if she were in a situation where she couldn’t call?

      Personally if she were in a situation where it was impossible or dangerous to walk out I’d tell her to take the first ride out of there she can. If theres no gardai, take a taxi and I’ll pay for it when she gets home (this is what my parents always told me to do, they’d go crazy if I took the hour long walk home from the bus), if theres no taxis then its a matter hitching a ride. If shes in that situation I wouldn’t want her to pass up a ride from a safe looking stranger just because they were a man or black, only to find no further offers or to get a ride with a white woman who turns out to be drunk at the wheel.

      Keeping kids safe isn’t as simple as trust women, be careful of men. Theres multiple factors involved.

  10. Joanna, while I liked all of the other articles on this topic, this is the one that most spoke to me and my own experiences and ways of being in the world.Fantastic! I really can’t thank you enough.

    I have a daughter too, and for me, I’d rather advise her in the way my gut tells me will increase her odds on safety than in a way that is more “socially appropriate,”or whatever, because I have raised her well to be an open-minded, non-bigoted person, and she totally is–she is AMAZING in this way. She well understands that all men are not rapists or dangerous to her. She also understands crime statistics.

    I have always advised her that if she were lost or in a situation where she needed help, and she had a choice between apparently kind looking people, she should just play it safer (safe-ER) and go to the woman. I simply do not agree that there is anything wrong with this.

    In the past few days, I have asked my husband, my father, my two brothers, and my male next door neighbor what they thought about this debate, and they all agreed 100% with me and Joanna and said this is how they all advise their own daughters. They do not feel persecuted by women or that women believe they are rapists. They understand why women might have fear, and do not think it is too much to ask of them to understand and respect that and not challenge it. They don’t take it personally, and some of them laughed at the idea of doing so. They absolutely did not feel it was bigoted. I had LOTS of great conversations with men I love and trust.

    Now, on a philosophical level, I agree with Lisa and Tom. It is worth working towards having a better world where this would not even be an issue. And teaching girls competence is important. But it feels like a deflection of Joanna’s question to say, “I would just say not to get in ANY strange car” or “I would teacher my daughter to fix her car.” Both of those are great pieces of advice. BUT…if my daughter ever CAN’T fix her car and DOES have to get help and make a choice, I want her to play the odds. Why? Because her literal life is more important to me than teaching her a lesson in gender-neutrality AT THAT MOMENT.

    There are millions of other moments for those positive messages, and she gets them, and they outweigh any minor “damage” done to her view of men by my and my husband’s advice. But, she is our CHILD. I know she is statistically more likely to suffer violent crime from a man than a woman, and my job as her mother is to protect her as best I can. So I give her the advice that increases her odds (and there are no guarantees because a woman can hurt her too, but this is about ODDS) and THEN ALSO I teach her in many ways, at many times respect for both genders,and all races, and all that other good stuff.

    All of the men in my life that I love and respect (and have checked in with) have the same view. This is not only a “feminist” view nor a uniquely female distorted view of some type, MANY men hold the same view.

    Joanna, thanks for articulating what I wish I could have. You totally nailed it–for me. And if this is about INDIVIDUALS and their stories, and individual human beings and their rights to be good humans as they see fit, without being gender-policed by one group or another, then I feel that I (and all those male relatives and friends) can advise the girls and women in our lives as we see fit out of out love and responsibility towards them.

    • Peter Houlihan says:

      “I think this is something most of you guys do every day. As Hugo maintains, “Good guys hold themselves and other men accountable, in public and in private.” Good guys act how Jacob acted, and they hold other men accountable to act the same. Those simple behaviors are the start of a revolution.”

      This bit bothers me. I know it isn’t what you took from it, but that article really does read like men are responsible for women’s safety and other men’s actions. As a concept it belongs in the 1800s when women were viewed as the weaker sex and men were all expected to be the manly virile champions of society. Assuming men to be guilty until proven innocent covers up female complicity and male goodness.

      As for the practical issue of keeping kids safe, I’ve no problem with offering practical advice, but I don’t agree that telling kids to trust strange women over strange men makes them safer. I can think of several instances where it might endanger them or encourage them to act against their best instincts. Stranger danger is genderblind.

    • I really hope you are all for gender roles to remain in society then and women to be seen as the primary child carer. What you advocate, is that males are less trustworthy around children. You teach your children this, other parents teach their children this and it becomes a society-wide belief. It DIRECTLY helps to stop men from being child-carers, causes suspicion of male daycare employee’s for example, makes men themselves afraid to open up to their own children. We have men so afraid they stop hugging their teenage daughters because others might think they’re doing something wrong, people who ask for male preschool teachers to be fired, and yet people still complain that men aren’t doing enough of the child-caring and spending enough time with the kids?

      I really do not know why we even bother talking about gender roles, no one wants to drop them. Instead of believing it’s a woman’s only job, we just change it to women are safer with kids and nooo we can’t trust men, if you have boys I wonder how they will feel growing up being afraid to interact with children? You either drop the anti-male prejudice, or you accept that women are always going to be considered the primary childcarer, you can’t have both. It’s a constant pressure on men to avoid any job or role with children, because of one of the last remaining acceptable prejudices. Why bother trusting your husband with your kids? Stats show either you, or him, are most likely to abuse and hurt your child? Do you raise them to be afraid of yourself? This is the part that many people fail on, they will gladly demonize STRANGE men who are statistically less likely to harm their kids whilst blindly trusting their friends, family.

      Go on, tell your husband, father, brother, neighbour that they’re the most likely person to sexually abuse your daughter for instance, see how they respond. Do you trust them 100%? Because that trust you have for them is exactly how abuse can happen without response. See what fear could do? See how stats can be used in very harmful ways? I’ll be surprised if this post is let through but hopefully someone reads it, I really want to know what they think on playing the odd’s because to me it sounds like a total lie if you ever read stats on abuse. The odds point out clearly that the people around them the most, are the most likely ones to abuse them and usually it’s parents yet parents will gladly talk about how they don’t trust strangers, especially the boogieman male stranger in the trenchcoat.

      • I’m a moderator. I don’t delete comments because they disagree with my views.

        I do not blindly trust family and friends because you are right that they are more likely to abuse a child than strangers. I’m talking about the circumstance of being alone by a broken down car and having a choice, which often is not even present. But if it is, I do believe that among strangers, a male is more likely to violently harm my child than a female. More men commit murder, robbery, and other violent crimes than women.

        You are free to disagree with my view, but it comes out of love and protectiveness for my child, and parents are like that, which is good.

        I was careful in my post not to generalize that you can’t trust men. I have also written extensively on the insidious and damaging effects on male teachers and child care givers. I’m am publicly on record as being against this stigma being put on men. I spent many years as a school administrator actively seeking men to hire. Your assumption about me advocating that men are not trustworthy to care for children is 100% the opposite of my view. You know what they say about people who assume.

        I feel you have taken one small slice of my parenting and generalized it to some all-encompassing negative view of men. The body of my work–my writing, my commenting, the way I live my life–does not support your assumptions.

        But please understand–I am entitled to my view, as you are entitled to yours. I do not know you. I would not make sweeping generalizations about you based on an internet comment. Thank you for weighing in. I accept your view. It is one possible view among many, as is mine. I love men. I devoted seven years of my life to working almost exclusively with men and boys in an educational setting where I was in an extreme minority and was passionate about improving the educational and life outcomes for boys.

        I wish more people withheld judgment and did not jump to conclusions, but I’m used to it. All I can do is try not to do that myself.

        • But that’s the thing, those small slipups in not teaching gender neutrality are what help to keep the gender roles going. By playing the odds, you’ve implied there is less safety with men. Odds are a man will be more likely to be violent but so are black people it seems. Would you also advocate they avoid them and go for the white person? I’m sure you can understand what I mean when I say those small slipups keep gender roles going, because teaching people that in any case it’s safer to be with women because of odds directly harms the ability to trust men whether it’s true or not.

          I have no problems with people trying to educate against abuse and stop it (although all versions must be taken into account), but when I as a male am trusted less with a child and thought to be under suspicion because of my gender and because a minority of men did horrible things it’s quite offensive. Playing the odds gives reason to take kids away from parents, but good luck at that ever happening. You’re entitled to your opinion of course but I am glad that you do try to think about the consequences and see the effects on men in childcare roles but do you also see how our culture portrays men as LESS trustworthy? Believe me, men do feel this, and it’s the good men who get annoyed because it goes against quite a bit of equalism teaching we’ve heard on prejudice and profiling.

  11. Julie Gillis says:

    I recall reading or seeing a show (I think it was a tv show) on a woman who had been abducted after hitchhiking. She’d gotten into a car with a man and a woman because she thought it would be safer. It was an outlier kind of story. She wound up being with this couple in a most distressing circumstance for several years apparently.

    The thing is about monsters is you ca actually see that they are monsters right? Huge ugly things. Wings, warts, claws. We created fairy tales about them to keep kids safe, yes? Trolls under bridges. Witches with candy houses. Snow Queens imprisoning children. Dragons.

    But anyone sociopathic enough to abuse a child or rape a person or kill someone or traffic humans or grift or run a mob or whathaveyounomatterthegenderetc. Well, they look like people. They don’t have wings or claws or breathe fire. They are gay, straight, white, black, hispanic, old, young, male, female, and they all are in human bodies.

    We don’t want to believe that the person we are with is evil. In fact, even when confronted with evidence that a person is probably acting oddly to you (like in a work place and someone is selling you out or bullying you) most of us (in my experience) do this thing were we figure its our fault.

    So what do we do? If you can’t see who the monsters are you have two choices.

    Trust no one.

    Trust everyone.

    Both choices have problems. This is the nugget of the whole schrodinger’s rapist thing. It could well be schroedinger’s murderer, or schroedinger’s liar or anything. One doesn’t know. One cannot tell just by looking at someone if they are a good person or not. One has to make a best guess, be prepared for a wide variety of outcomes, and try to trust.

    We need to reward people for trusting (while being prepared) and not blame them if they get caught by a monster. We need to blame the monsters.

    Good men and good women can do this, I feel certain of it. Most of us do this all the time. We trust as best we can and try to take care of each other when bad things happen.

    I don’t know what other choice there can be if we want to live in the group structures we live in.

    • Peter Houlihan says:

      Well said.

      On the point of wanting to trust the people we know, that woman (if we’re thinking of the same one) continued to live with her abductor for years after she was freed.

      Theres other examples of child abductors using other children at bait. That said, looking for families is probably good advice in general, even if I disagree that women are necessarily safer than men.

  12. Joanna–I’m so glad you posted this. I’ve been thinking of responding to some of the recent articles, but just couldn’t get my thoughts together in one place! Here is the crux (for me): “There is a difference between Feminists trying to make you feel bad about being a man (which is dead wrong) and us asking you to recognize the way most women feel, and asking you to respect that.”

    I, in no way, look at all men as being dangerous–that would be plain self-destructive, wouldn’t it? And I have actually taken rides from both men and women. Here are two examples: When I was a little girl, about six, I left my elementary school to walk home. There was a torrential downpour happening and I had only my raincoat and my little umbrella which was no use in the strong wind. I had quite a walk (don’t ask me where my mother was or why she didn’t come to get me) ahead of me. A woman, who I knew worked at my school (but I had not ever spoken or met), pulled up next to me and asked if I wanted a ride home. I said yes. I proceeded to direct her to my house where she dropped me off minutes later. My mother, needless to say, was furious with me–I had gotten in the car with a “stranger.”

    There was another time, in my early thirties, when I had been roller-blading and got very sick and nauseous. I literally could not stand up without getting dizzy. I was close to a small boat club and went in. A man there offered to give me a ride home–I said yes. I trusted my gut which told me he was a good guy. He dropped me off at my apartment and that was that. In both cases, my instinct told me that I had nothing to fear. Of course, there have been countless times that I have assessed a particular male who I’ve noticed either following me, or one who gave me that eerie feeling, and walked the other way. I believe that it is called “fight or flight,” and is a defense mechanism we all possess. Without it, we wouldn’t even know when to cross the street.

    I have been hyper-aware of the dangerous world we live in since I was a child (including the fear of being raped)–and I believe that awareness has served me well. The bottom line is that we must trust our feelings. I did appreciate Lisa’s piece–but I have to say, I don’t know any women who are afraid of ALL men. I plan on teaching my daughter to trust her instinct–not to be fearful of men in general, but to know when something doesn’t feel right, that feeling is right. I don’t want her to think she might be offending someone in the process. At that point–she needs to trust her instincts.

    Thanks again for your post.

  13. Kirsten (in MT) says:

    Re: getting into cars with strange men

    I recently did this. At 3 o’clock in the morning. In the middle of rural nowhere. Without any other person present.

    No matter how well you take care of your car- believe me, my 378,000+ mile Honda Element is treated quite lovingly -at some point many of us are going to need help. For me, it was when my alternator died on I-90 in Montana about 15 miles from the nearest town and about 50 miles from home in the middle of the freaking night. I called a tow truck.

    You want to talk about playing the odds? Guess what happens in Montana if you call for a tow truck? Odds are good that a man will show up driving it. Odds are also overwhelmingly good that strange men you interact with will not harm you.

    So it is not surprising that when the tow truck arrived, a man I didn’t know showed up, he drove me and my car home, and very predictably I came to absolutely no harm. I had gotten into his vehicle without so much as knowing his last name. Nobody would have missed me for at least a couple of days had something happened. Even by the odds-if we’re going by real information and not scare-mongering stereotypes-I was very safe through this whole encounter with a stranger.

    Nonetheless, gender stereotypes are a crude tool to use, often misleading, and unnecessary when we have more information available to us. My advice for accepting help is this: don’t rely on primitive gender profiling by scary stereotype but on your own intentionally-developed powers of observation, your intuition, and so on. Judge individuals based on their own individual behaviors and your assessments thereof. And be prepared to get out of a situation you’ve gotten into-with a strange man or a strange woman-should your assessment have been in error.

    • Thank-you for not automatically assuming the male is more of a risk. It really makes me wonder why parents talk about the odds, and stranger danger when the stats clearly show it’s the parents who are most likely to abuse or close friends/relatives. Seems less about odds and more about desperate attempts to satisfy their fears, but it’s a pity because teaching the children that behaviour simply causes fear and usually it’s fear of men. We don’t focus enough on how many men and women are good, sacrifice themselves daily to protect others but instead we live in a climate of fear…Terrorists (omg it’s a muslim, run!), pedophiles (oh nooo a man! lookout!), use to be witches but hooray science, communists, rogue states with nukes!!!111, etc.

      Nothing wrong with being cautious but those stereotypes aren’t helpful, they were used once to demonize black men and now it’s simply any man can be a rapist!, prejudice is alive n well and the stats are used to justify it.

    • Peter Houlihan says:

      Theres probably a difference between being wary of strangers who just happen along and strangers that have a reason to be there (like mechanics), but good attitude!

  14. Excerpt:
    “He also said that I shouldn’t get in a car with a man I didn’t know. I already knew that, of course.”

    It seems to me that feminists see rape everywhere. Feminists remind me of the kid in the 6th sense.

    “I see rapists, they’re everywhere!”

    It seems to me the VAST majority of women seem much less concerned about rape than do most feminists.

    These women take almost NO precautions against getting raped. Millions of women nightly get into cars with men on first dates, or take them home (or go to the man’s home) on the first date.

    The rampant hookup culture belies 1) the concept that all women (rather than just feminists) are concerned about rape and 2) that rapists are indeed everywhere.

    The simple fact is that feminists use rape (whatever itls level of scarcity or abundance) as a club to beat men over the head and try to make them feel guilty about their gender or libido.

    I’m not buying it.

    • Joanna Schroeder says:

      Lucky for you, John D, you don’t have to buy it.

      I’m not selling it.

      I’m telling my experience and my opinions. Don’t want to buy it? Don’t. Doesn’t bother me one bit.

  15. Kirsten (in MT) says:

    Let’s take a closer look at this notion of playing the odds. I’m posting references but not as hyperlinks so I don’t end up in moderation queue limbo.

    Bureau of Justice Statistics evidence from 1993-2008 indicates that women are more likely to be victims of both fatal and non-fatal violence committed by non-strangers than by strangers.
    Reference: bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/fvv.pdf

    In other words, if we are truly playing the odds, we must recommend that women prefer help from strangers over non-strangers whenever that is an option. How many of you suggesting that women should “play the odds” and prefer strange women over strange men agree with this? You would recommend that your daughters, sisters, girlfriends and wives, and so on look for a strange man to get a ride from rather than accepting one from a male they know? If you don’t recommend this, then you really don’t believe in blindly playing the odds.

    • Kirsten

      Using those stats is dishonest.

      Everyone in this debate knows that NCVS is problematic, that one gender is far more likely to report a crime and that there are far more reliable types of surveys for getting actually rates of victimization.

      • Kirsten (in MT) says:

        Fine. Go ahead and post your data on stranger vs. non-stranger violence. Let’s look at that, too.

      • Kirsten (in MT) says:

        And, I just double-checked that report I cited. The fatal violence data does not come from NCVS. It is from the Uniform Crime Reporting Program which does not draw on the NCVS at all.

        • DavidByron says:

          Crime reporting is not a survey. In addition the UCR has even more sexist definitions like saying men can’t be raped. The NISVS survey is the latest and greatest for accurately measuring this stuff. It is actually a good methodology and although it remains female biased it is much less so than others.

          • Kirsten (in MT) says:

            Okay, like I said, feel free to post your own data showing that non-strangers are less dangerous than strangers. I’m still waiting to see anyone show that we are advocating making these sorts of decisions based on any kind of actual data instead of collectivist assumptions.

      • She only mentioned women, so if it’s only women reporting the crime it’s still valid.

    • Peter Houlihan says:

      Theres a problem with that: the only way to avoid violence perpetrated by someone you know is not to know anyone, which isn’t how humans work.

      Avoiding violence by someone you don’t know is easier, as Joanna paraphrased Lisa’s advice: Credit Card, Gas, AAA Card and Cell Phone. That and obvious things like avoiding bad areas and not getting hammered off your face in a bar and sleeping with strangers. Nothing can keep you completely safe, but those narrow the odds alot.
      .

  16. Would you move in with a man or a woman?
    Who is more likely to file false accusations against you and clean out your house while you are trying to get out of jail?

  17. Kirsten (in MT) says:

    While we’re looking at data and data sources, here’s a request for the “play the odds and avoid strange men” advocates: where are you getting your information on the alleged odds? What specific odds are you talking about and what is your source for that information? Are we really talking about playing the odds or merely about playing based on assumptions?

  18. There is a difference between Feminists trying to make you feel bad about being a man (which is dead wrong) and us asking you to recognize the way most women feel, and asking you to respect that.

    Speaking from experience, there really is not a difference. Anytime you hold individual men responsible for other men’s actions just because they are men, you are going to make men feel bad for being men. It does not matter how you try to soften the blow, feminists still blame all men for the actions of a few, and expect men to take responsibility for that.

    I am responsible for a lot of things. I am responsible for my own actions. I am responsible for the things that directly result from my actions. Like feminists, I agree that I am solely responsible for and deserved the abuse I suffered as a child, although we disagree on the reason why. However, I am not responsible for anything that I did not cause or affect, nor am I responsible for things that occurred long before I was born or without my knowledge. I am certainly not responsible for the way some women choose to feel.

    And the curious thing about this request is that it does not apply in the reverse. No feminist accepts responsibility for the violence or views of other feminists or women. It is strange for people to ask someone to do something they will not do themselves.

    As for respecting what women feel, it is unfair to demand that men respect being thought of as inherently dangerous. People are entitled to feel whatever they want, but you cannot tell others that they have to agree with horrible views about them.

    • Joanna Schroeder says:

      If your friend were making lewd jokes about a woman, giving commentary excusing rape, getting into the personal space of a female or making a female uncomfortable, would you say something to him? Would you say “this isn’t right”? Would you ask the woman who is made uncomfortable by a man if she needed any assistance? Would you report a crime against a woman, even if it were your friend or colleague or boss who committed it? Would you call for the removal of judges, police or other authorities who do not follow proper procedures in the cases of women?

      These questions actually should be asked of ALL crime and inappropriate behavior. But in this case, I’m asking strictly about women.

      That’s what I’m calling you to do. That’s it. Hold other men responsible to the same level you hold yourself. I do that with women, and I don’t feel guilty about what women do to men, children or other women. I simply expect them to do better when they’ve failed and call them out on bad behavior.

      • Joanne

        I keep reading and finding these Polarities of men have to hold men accountable and women hold woman accountable.

        I don’t think it’s your intent to create a divide, far from it, but the same thing keeps on happening and frankly is getting in the way.

        I’m human first and male second. If I see action which needs to be taken for the welfare of another human I act. The gender focus seems to get in the way.

        It even alienates groups who fit into the list of questions you have asked. Disabled, Elderly, Children, Race …. the list goes on and on.

        You say “I do that with women, and I don’t feel guilty about what women do to men, children or other women. I simply expect them to do better when they’ve failed and call them out on bad behavior.”

        Forgive me, but I keep getting confused by what appear to be mixed messages. Can you clarify, is your position, to paraphrase, that men should police men and women police women?

        I’m not being cute or as someone has called me “Micro-Aggressive”, but I would like to get it clarified so that I understand your views and the points you make.

        … and I actually feel resentment ( not aimed at you ) that I now feel obliged to start apologizing for asking questions or making points due to the levels of “Micro-Aggressive” behavior that so many round here do display and project onto others. P^/

      • Allow me to answer your questions with a question: why you assume that I and other men do not already do these things for everyone?

        To ask me those questions implies that you are judging me not by my own actions, but by the what you assume all or most men do.

        As for you not feeling guilty for other women’s actions, I suspect that is because no one blames women for other women’s behavior (or for their own behavior), particularly not feminists.

  19. Feminism is not at all serious about ending violent and abusive behavior in adults.

    If it was it would be drawing our attention to the fact that women commit most child abuse, and female perpetrated violence instead of always glossing over it.

    The fun feminists are being used by the radical feminists, to spread their men are the only problem and rape culture hate propaganda.

  20. Liz McLellan says:

    “. There is a difference between Feminists trying to make you feel bad about being a man (which is dead wrong)”

    There is a difference between some women trying to make you feel bad about being a man….

    Suggested edit for accuracy and de-escalation….

    • Peter Houlihan says:

      Male feminists do it too, it is a bit of a running theme in feminism, if not a defining characteristic. I suspect that will change as male perspectives enter the gender debate more.

      • Male voices will not be allowed in.

      • Seriously: giving men a voice is entirely different from giving women a voice. Giving men a voice would be a radical action that would be of concern to the ruling class. Feminism never did anything that bothered the ruling class. Women are not prisoners. Women are not the homeless. Women are not veterans. Feminism was always a whiney wealthy white women’s movement. No threat whatsoever to the elites.

        They looked like a threat for a few years because feminists (gender essentialists that they all are) claimed women were more moral than men and when they got the vote all sorts of radical stuff would happen. Starting with prohibition. So the elites blocked women’s vote for business reasons — they believed in the myth of angelic women too — really its only in the feminism movement that Victorian prejudice persists. Once prohibition passed anyway women’s vote followed. Then everyone figured out women just vote the exact same way as men and for ever after the elites were very happy having feminists to bash down men for them.

        Because men form the underclass. And the last thing you want is to let the underclass think they have a voice.

    • Joanna Schroeder says:

      Hey Liz,

      I totally get what you’re saying here, and it would seem more accurate, but in fact I’m speaking of both male and female Feminists (specifically as this article references Hugo Schwyzer). What I probably should have said, if I was being ultra-careful was “some Feminists”…

      However, what I am answering is the claim that “Feminism” and “Feminists” are trying to make men feel guilty. I am speaking for Feminism, but as it is such a broad umbrella, I hope that people are able to know that of course I do not speak for *all* Feminists in that. (of course you and I both know that most people who escalate commentary in this type of setting are not looking to be reasonable).

      I’m not even looking to de-escalate. Honestly, as I said before (above) I’m not trying to sell anything so I don’t care if the MRAs or other people who don’t like my message don’t “buy” it. I’m speaking *my* truth, and when met with logical and respectful comments (Lisa, or you) I am 100% willing to concede my shortfalls (of which I have many).

      These guys (gender neutral) neither bother me nor scare me. My truth is my truth.

  21. How foolish are some of you to believe that simply calling somoene out on their behavior is gonna do anything ?

    You disapprove of their behavior ? so what, you’re not the first and won’t be the last person to tell them that.

  22. Yes, folks, we men can be friendly and sociable with no ulterior motives.

    • “with no ulterior motives.”

      Do you define ulterior motive as wanting sex. Because I don’t define that as an ulterior motive…I define it as a fantastic motive.

  23. The Diamond Dazzle Stick ad on the right is hilaroous….

  24. DavidByron says:

    your daughter should play the numbers and know that if she is going to be raped or murdered, it is most likely going to be by a man and make a choice based upon that

    Again this is sexist. It is discriminatory, pejorative and irrational.

    You know its rubbish from what you said in your example. If your dad had not had a kid with him would he have left the woman to die in the snow? And would he really want his daughter to die in the snow rather than get a lift from a man?

    All you are doing is rationalizing prejudice.

    But for the sake of argument lets pretend that your claim has some factual merit. What of it? You are then in a position of consciously deciding to punish and discriminate against all men. You are consciously spreading a vicious stereotype about men that you know is false. And you are working hard to justify your actions. That is not how someone who cares about equality would act.

    Ugh. OK I am just too disgusted to continue with this comment.

    I think anyone who uses the phrase “rape culture” will just get dumped in the bigot file after this. The only rape culture I see is inside the heads of feminists. It’s a hate culture.

  25. DavidByron says:

    This article needs a disclaimer like this:

    WARNING : not all women are like this one!

    Because I come away from reading this very angry indeed at women. And it isn’t their fault. It’s not all women who are this disgusting and sexist.

    You know what? If it was me in the car and Joanna was the one stuck in the snow going to freeze to death I think I’d tell her.

    Oh what? There’s no nice woman to save you today? You want to get rescued by the potential rapist do you? Oh I am sorry but I couldn’t possibly put you through that risk. No, no, you can stay out here waiting for a woman. I wouldn’t want to contribute to the rape culture.

    And then drive off.

    • I understand that frustration. I am a very tall, very large male, I am aware it’s quite intimidating however I’m more likely to belt an abuser up than ever harm an innocent. Where they see potential rapist, they should also see potential savior, potential good samaritan. I have first-aid training and I am quite aware of not only violence against women, but violence against men yet automatically we think potential rapist, potential negative, even though it’s more likely to be potential help.

      I don’t pick up hitch hikers, if kids are lost I sit there worrying like hell over what to do (though I’ll probably call police if there carers aren’t there, or seek a FEMALE to go ask simply because society doesn’t see females as a threat). I can’t even goto my cousins soccer games to take photos for him because of silly fears of what I could be, yeah, a guy taking photos of his cousin playing sports who is in a camera club and has an interest in portraiture and photography as a whole. People justify these prejudices by saying the stats, but they fail to realize the stats don’t show most men as the problem so why punish them? This fear culture is becoming as harmful as any rape culture and that is sad.

      • DavidByron says:

        Ironically if all women were like Joanna they’d never be a choice between a man and a woman because the Joanna’s of the world would never risk rescuing anybody. What if that hitchhiker is a potential rapist? It’s a non-zero risk. Her father was willing to take that risk, even with his kid in the car, on a perfect stranger that he had an inkling might be in a violent relationship. Would Joanna?

        And yes as a practical matter since it’s men who take the risks and do the rescuing, any woman who has a knee-jerk prejudice against men is likely to be increasing her risk.

        • The logic in this is actually scary but true. I fear for the future with how stats are used in ways to damage our relationships with men. What’s sad is usually the people who do it, end up speaking out about how bad it is men don’t help with the kids and cries of sexism, gender roles, etc. Yet they can’t see how they are reinforcing those gender roles which assume a woman is a better child carer.

      • Of course not all men who offer a stranded woman a ride are rapists. But some are (read the news if you don’t believe me). Don’t you guys understand, why would I ever take a risk that has even a small chance of getting me raped and killed? (Especially if I have other options , like calling a friend to pick me up.) If you were in my shoes, would the risk be worth it? Ask yourself that. Seriously, really think about it. If there is an 0.1% chance that the person offering you the ride will kill you, do you accept the ride? Or do you say no thanks, I’ll wait for my friend and the tow truck? What percentage of risk is acceptable to you, personally? Remember we are talking about a risk of being seriously hurt and/or killed.

        This is not about stereotyping men it’s about taking reasonable steps to preserve one’s PERSONAL SAFETY. Which is far more important to me than someone else’s hurt feelings.

        • Do you understand what discrimination is?

          I feel I have to explain it to you. OK. Many people feel that treating some groups of people badly just because of how they happened to be born is unfair and immoral. For example someone who says they will hire only white people is discriminating on the basis of race. That is called “racism”. You are advocating discriminating on the basis of gender. That is called “sexism”.

          Don’t you guys understand, why would I ever take a risk that has even a small chance of getting me raped and killed?

          Because your actions are discrimination and hence they are immoral.

          But am I allowed to discriminate if I think it will get me a tiny advantage?

          No. People who discriminate usually believe it gives them an advantage. Typically they have stereotypical beliefs about the minority group.

          • If the choice is my safety or making some kind of “point” to myself about how I am not discriminatory then I will take my personal safety. I was just reading in the paper about a girl in a earby city who accepted a ride from a guy after her car broke down and he tried to rape her. Luckily she escaped. I don’t know the stats but I’ve read enough cases like that to conclude it is not particularly uncommon.

            • So basically you want to criticise others for sexism but when you do it then it’s OK?

            • It is not sexist to be concerned about my personal safety. How many times do I have to say that?

              But this argument really isn’t going anywhere so, DavidByron, what do you suggest I do if my car breaks down and a man stops to offer me a ride? How to I determine if he is “dangerous” or not?

              Do I just blithely assume that no man is ever dangerous (because otherwise I’d be sexist) and get into the car? Every time?

              Is that what you would suggest your daughter, sister, or mother should do?

              Or should I use some criteria do decide whether or not to get in the car? What would those criteria be?

              Should I consider the time of day or night, the neighborhood, the make/model of car, what the man looks like?

              What would you tell your 15-year-old daughter? I am really interested in your response.

            • Well the views you are telling others stops many good men from stopping to help because they don’t want to be assumed to be bad and have the very uncomfortable experience of putting a woman in fear. So we have women afraid of being hurt by men, men afraid to help women for fear of those women being afraid of them and how this will harm them.

              Internal instinct is helpful but be careful of bias. Are you afraid of your friends, your mother for instance? Being as mothers are most likely to kill a child you should probably teach the 15 year old daughter to avoid her mother. Then also teach them to avoid friends and family who are most likely to abuse them. You see from what I’ve seen of the stats is stranger attacks for women are more rare, it’s usually men who are more at risk of being attacked by a stranger, and women more at risk of someone they know quite well. So if you’re teaching your daughter about safety then teaching her to avoid strange men is less helpful overall, than teaching her to avoid any men she knows, and her mother, and if we add in bullying stats then any male or female, add in illness by communicable disease and you pretty much avoid all humans, add in danger of car accidents then avoid driving or being in a car.

              In the interests of safety I hope you also teach your daughter to eat very healthy foods and avoid obesity. Avoid smoking too, but that’s a given. Does this illustrate the point of how fear can get out of control? If you’re that worried of asking help from a male, learn self defense and carry a gun if you can, learn how to use it and you’ll probably drastically reduce your chance of harm. I really do not understand why people keep pushing stranger danger when we’re more at risk by our loved ones…

            • You are completely avoiding my question.

              What would you tell your daughter about whether she should accept a ride from strange man. What criteria should she use. This is a real life situation and thinkimg about abusive mothers and nutrition is not helpful for deciding what to do at 2 am on the side of the road.

            • P.s. I’ve taken self defense classes, and they always tell you to (a) trust your instincts and (b) never put yourself in a risky situation that you can’t get out of. A car is a classic example of a place where you are trapped if something goes wrong. Self defense advice = don’t get in the car if your instincts tell you it’s dangerous.

              They also tell you not to rely on weapons. Even if you are carrying a gun (illegal in most states without a concealed weapons permit), it has to be accessible, you have to know how to use it, and itis fairly easy for someone to take it away from you at close quarters. Now the rapist has a gun that he’s pointing at you.

            • I’d tell my daughter to be cautious of all people but don’t profile them, if she’s in dire need of help at 2am then ask a man or a woman for help. I can’t tell her to choose only women because women aren’t some bastion of safety, they’re human like men and humans can be both great and also bad. Because naive attempts at safety don’t particularly make her much safer, I’d have to hide her from all people to make her safe.

              Question is why are your instincts telling you it’s dangerous? Do they tell you it’s dangerous to be around your family too?

            • John Anderson says:

              How would you feel if you told your daughter that if she had a choice between accepting a rider from a man and accepting it from a woman, she should always pick the woman and that choice just happened to be the wrong one the time that she made it? How comforting would it be to know that she was playing the odds? Right or wrong, most men would probably tell their daughters not to be out alone at 2 AM. It’s unfortunate that we’d let our daughters miss out on a lot of life out of fear.

            • van Rooinek says:

              the views you are telling others stops many good men from stopping to help because they don’t want to be assumed to be bad and have the very uncomfortable experience of putting a woman in fear

              Yeah, had that happen once. Stopped to help a stranded woman, and terrified her instead. Learned that the hard way.

              Now, with universal cell phones, it’s not necessary. But back then (80’s) she could have been stuck on that freeway median for a long time. I’ll never know – I cleared out of there as soon as it was clear that I wasn’t wanted.

            • J.G. te Molder says:

              Actually, it is extremely uncommon. You see, I do know the stats. Rape, especially from male on female, is the least violent crime perpetrated in our society. It is all but non-existent. In fact, so unlikely is it that someone picking up someone who’s car broke down would turn out to be a rapist, that I don’t believe the story. Coupled with the high number of false rape accusations, she was probably lying.

            • Random_Stranger says:

              A little late to the comments here…but has everyone fallen off the turnip truck?

              Yes, thieves, rapists and murderers are a tiny fraction of the population, but its not like hitchhikers and their drivers are representative of the overall population. Getting into a car with a stranger is super dangerous and most reasonably aware and well-intentioned people self-select out of the activity, ensuring the remaining population of enthusiastic participants are almost surely psycho.

              And we’re talking a false choice here, this isn’t a gendered division. As a guy, I wouldn’t accept an unsolicited ride from a strange man OR women. I’d wonder what’s wrong with them, if they had a gun, or an accomplice lurking in the trunk or back seat.

              If they’re well intentioned, they’ll accept my request to inform the highway patrol instead. But pretty much the only way I’m getting in that car is if I’m already left for dead anyway.

            • John Anderson says:

              That’s a tough one because if nobody took risks for equality, I’m pretty sure equality will never be achieved. Should I point out sexual harassment when I see it, I might lose my job or be retaliated against? Should I object if someone tells a sexist joke, they might get violent? What if someone were being raped in the car? Should I stop to find out? What if they were just having sex? I could have two very angry people on my hands. Should I take down the license plate just in case? If I read about a woman being raped and killed a couple days later, it may lead to the rapist’s capture, but would taking down the plate have done her any good? What if they were both women? Would that make you less likely to think a rape was occurring?

              Ultimately the question is what are we willing to risk to make the world a better place?

        • “Don’t you guys understand, why would I ever take a risk that has even a small chance of getting me raped and killed? (Especially if I have other options , like calling a friend to pick me up.)”
          Do you bother reading statistics at all? Your friend is more likely to harm you. You have a risk with every single human being pretty much of being raped, killed, tortured.

          In fact you probably have more of a chance to be badly injured or killed in a vehicle regardless of who drives it, vs being attacked by some stranger in a vehicle. I haven’t seen the exact stats for murdered or raped by accepting lifts however so this may or may not be true, but it’s to illustrate that there is the very real possibility that you take FAR FAR FAR more risk to your life than posed by some stranger. This is why the discrimination is bad, you should be more fearful of your dating partner vs some stranger and sadly enough your boyfriend should be fearful of you according to latest stats on abuse if you are to be fearful of him. Everyone should be afraid, let’s never take risks and see how life goes then.

        • John Anderson says:

          I think that a very reasonable compromise is that women have a right to turn down assistance from men as men have a right to turn down assistance from women, but they have a right to think, not necessarily say, that you’re a jerk for doing it.

          I look at the issue of same gender care in healthcare. Men have a right to expect same gender care in hospitals just like women for intimate procedures as outlined in the patient’s bill of rights. Men should be allowed to decline intimate medical procedures and hospitals should be accountable in ensuring that men receive the medical care they deserve, whether that entail balancing the gender composition of their staff, bringing in male burses on an “in call” basis or transferring the male patient to another facility at their expense where he can have the procedure done.

          I’ve just stated a real life example of how women’s employment opportunities can be adversely impacted by a man’s insistence on same gender care for intimate procedures. Do men have a moral obligation to undergo cross gender intimate care treatment, if that is all that is available rather than risk injury, death, or a substantially reduced quality of life? Does it change if the hospital has to pay him restitution? What if he’s afraid that the female nurse is going to molest him? He has a right to it, but should he have a right knowing that if a man doesn’t than a woman shouldn’t either.

          Considering this, does anyone want to change their position?

      • Good point, Archy. I’d offer to help any stranded person, but if they responded out of some rape-suspicion, I’d just laugh in their face and drive off.

        Yes, you (random man-hater and man-fearer) may have irrational and prejudicial fears.. but they’re YOUR problem, not mine. I don’t have to show your bigotry any respect or consideration whatsoever.

      • van Rooinek says:

        I understand that frustration. I am a very tall, very large male, I am aware it’s quite intimidating however I’m more likely to belt an abuser up than ever harm an innocent. Where they see potential rapist, they should also see potential savior, potential good samaritan

        I have no patience with leftist “rape culture” nonsense, but I have to challenge you on this point. I, too, am a very tall guy, and women who don’t know me SHOULD be wary of me. They can’t read my mind, they can’t know that I wouldn’t harm a hair on their head.

        Once or twice I’ve told people that they were unwise to trust me: “I know I’m a good guy… but YOU don’t. You might make a mistake next time!”

        I don’t blame them when they cross the street upon seeing me after dark. I blame the criminals. The crime of rape “shouldn’t” exist., but IT DOES. Welcome to the real world.

    • Julie Gillis says:

      That’s an amazing comment, DavidByron. I’m not sure what purpose it serves to relay a fantasy in which you’d allow anyone to die who held opinions you find abhorrent. By that pattern, perhaps I could say the same thing about seeing you stranded. I wouldn’t leave you to die/stay stranded though, because I’m not nihilistic like that. Perhaps you wouldn’t even accept the ride from me though. In which case I’d call 911 and wait for them to arrive, leave, fully aware of your disdain for me, but safe in the knowledge I didn’t let you come to harm.
      Peace, David. I wish all of us could calm the F down and find a little peace. That’s not nearly so much fun is it though.

      • DavidByron says:

        Obvious it is rhetorical. I don’t think people deserve to die for having prejudices. I don’t even think George Bush deserves to die, much less Joanna.

        Still, as I say, following Joanna’s own “logic” nobody would ever stop to help anyone else ever because doing the right thing is never worth it if there’s even an infinitesimal chance it might cost you something.

        I’m not sure what purpose it serves

        It serves the clear purpose of communicating to Joanna that her opinion is unacceptable and immoral. If you saw someone expressing a racist opinion would you not do much the same?

        Btw I hope you were not asking rhetorically. If you don’t know why I am doing something you can always ask.

        • Julie Gillis says:

          To me, “Still, as I say, following Joanna’s own “logic” nobody would ever stop to help anyone else ever because doing the right thing is never worth it if there’s even an infinitesimal chance it might cost you something.” this serves a purpose.

          What you said, as a rhetorical device, seemed to me (in my opinion at least) to serve the purpose of being inflammatory. A “zinger” of a comment if you will. And so as much as my question could itself seem rhetorical, I didn’t know what purpose you thought it meant. If you felt her work was unacceptable and immoral, I think telling her so plainly, asking her to engage you in discussion, would get you farther in terms of an actual resolution.

          In this case I think it just made you look provocative. If that was your purpose, so be it.

          I enjoy reading a lot of your posts. Many of them seem clear, direct, intelligent and even if I disagree with you, I can deal with where you are. But posts like that often just seem to be mean for mean’s sake. And that obviously is your right and choice. I don’t approach dialogue in quite that way, but if you do, then there may be posts we’ll only find ourselves at loggerheads over.

          • Julie Gillis says:

            Anyway, your example didn’t seem fantastical enough for satire to make your point. It just seemed nasty. Maybe that was your point though.

            • DavidByron says:

              Well that’s your fault frankly. You think I LIKE beating up on people? It makes me feel like shit actually. But I know if I don’t do it nobody will. You could have told her all that same stuff and you could have done it much nicer because she’d have taken it from you. Instead it was left to me so I had to be the “asshole” (which is also in part because a man “attacking” a woman always looks like an asshole).

              You think it’s easy to go around telling people they SUCK all the time?

              And as for telling her directly in case you missed it there’s several such comments from me and others both on this thread and the other one.

            • Julie Gillis says:

              That made me laugh out loud.
              I see. You beating up on Joanna is my (or someone’s) fault. I (or someone) made you be an asshole. And you’d rather other people be assholes and beat up on people so you don’t have to be an asshole because it makes you feel like shit. Truly one of the most narcissistic things I’ve ever read.

              You have every control over whether you beat up on people, sir.

              Nothing was left to you to do. So far as I know there isn’t some organized request for David Byron to beat up on commenters when other commenters don’t behave as David Byron thinks they should. That’s all you.

            • DavidByron says:

              OK you’re not listening now so I will end this. But if you are able to listen at some point in the future I will explain. At any rate I’m glad you’re laughing.

      • DavidByron says:

        By that pattern, perhaps I could say the same thing about seeing you stranded

        But you don’t find any of my views “abhorrent”, do you? You just think some of my views are incorrect.

        There’s no symmetry in this stuff. Only the feminists on this board are advocating sex discrimination. Nobody here is saying treat women worse. The debate is between those of us who want equality and those who want to treat men worse.

        • Julie Gillis says:

          First of all. I”m a feminist. Secondly, I’m advocating equality for men, boys, etc. That’s why I’m here. You can disagree all you want, but I’m a feminist and I’m for love peace plenty great sex less war (no war!) wonderful educations for kids, a world where gays and straights and trans can live together and rainbows and unicorns fart fountains of gold chocolate.

          I don’t know quite enough about you to know if all of your views are abhorrent, but I can’t say I prefer your debating style. I have been listening, and the last thing you said was in reference to how it’s the fault of people like me that you have to be an asshole. And I think you can well choose to be an asshole without any help from the rest of us.

          Or was that satire and a very dry non-American wit. Are you from the UK? If that’s the case perhaps I”m simply misreading your humor style, but dude if not…

          I’m truly not making you do anything. In fact, I’ve been trying to engage you kindly for the most part. I like Joanna. Is she perfect? No. Is this entire set up on the comments designed for mutually beneficial conversation right now? Doesn’t seem to be. Good luck to you and I”m quite sure I’ll be reading you onwards. You’ll be reading me too.

          • DavidByron says:

            Well I am English, but the problem may be more that (as is well know) feminists don’t have a sense of humor?

            It is possible to misread a lot of stuff ; if you don’t ask then you won’t know.

            I didn’t ask if you thought all my views were abhorrent.
            I asked if you thought any of my views were abhorrent.

            I like Joanna too. But she is advocating that men be treated worse than women here. As I said, no person on this board is advocating that women should be treated worse than men, but many people are advocating the reverse. I didn’t say you.

            • Julie Gillis says:

              I answered your question. I also commented further. Surely, you don’t mind additional commentary? I know what you asked.

              I’m an improvisational comedian, emcee, and I run a comedy festival. You should check it out. It’s filled with women!

              I can’t always read tone, David. My guess is, as silly as it is to assume, that if I’d heard you say many of your statements I’d have found you humorous or even charming. As it stands, and given the heated nature of the last few days, it was relatively easy for me to see the words without charm. I think all humans wind up getting treated terribly at some point. I for one, and I believe Joanna too and the writers, male and female that I’ve met through writing here all would like people to be treated better online and in person, in custody and in work and in sex. How we go about that is obviously contentious.

              I’d never leave you in the road if I found your views abhorrent. I do think, though there have SO many posts and so much to read that I’m gobsmacked at this point, that I think (at this point my brain is clogged with too many comments to deal with) I find your thoughts on feminism (at least the feminism and feminists I’ve been around, known etc) distasteful. And I am clear you find feminism, at the very least, distasteful. So I suppose we are even.

              I have to go to rehearsal now and be funny. :) I won’t be commenting until tomorrow at the earliest.

          • I’m a man. If you and I share the same environment YOU are safer than you would have otherwise been. So are the inanimate objects, every element of the flora and fauna and everybody else within that sphere of influence. You, meanwhile, disdain me for the very things that lend me the capacity to provide you this safety and comfort.

            In essence you are unworthy of my protection. Nonetheless I would give it because the things I have for free oblige their use for others.

            Unfortunately this was a lesson I learned from the patriarchy so it’s destined to be misunderstood.

          • “I’m for love peace plenty great sex less war (no war!) wonderful educations for kids, a world where gays and straights and trans can live together and rainbows and unicorns fart fountains of gold chocolate.”

            I wouldn’t be eating THAT chocolate!

    • Hey DavidBaron. I think you may have made some great points in some comments, but I think it’s really important that you take a moment and realize that you are talking *to a human being* in these comments. Just because I am a person who has chosen to write for a publication doesn’t make me inhuman. It doesn’t make me your punching bag.

      You would *leave me to die*? Would you say that to my face if I were to tell you that story about my father, if we were at the home of a mutual friend? Would you say that to me in front of other people whom we both knew?

      You extrapolate what I’ve said into me saying NO ONE should ever help anyone? Again, would you say this to my face? You don’t even know me, did you read the other pieces I’ve written for GMP even? Have you seen my blog? Get to know me a little, just a little.

      I’ll tell you guys a few things: I am a Feminist, I have been one since I was very young. I was raised in a town where girls in my high school were raped by jocks and everyone knew it, though no one reported it. One girl was terrified and people, even adults, shamed her into silence, publicly. I spoke out and was called a slut, a whore, a bitch, a Feminazi. All the while, my best friends were almost all guys. I didn’t blame them. I loved them, they were my oasis in a sea of madness, which was populated also by females.

      I am also a wife and a mother. I worked to pay my way through UCLA, I worked 50 hours a week and took classes all day long on my two days off, and wrote papers and read my work until 2 am every night, then woke in the morning every morning to go to work. My father worked in a factory almost his whole life. My grandfather is alive in his mid-90s. I have dogs, my son has a lizard. I used to sing. I’m writing a novel – a love story. My favorite movie is Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. I laugh at nerdy word-humor.

      Why am I telling you ANY of this? I don’t actually care if you know any of it, most of it is completely unimportant and has nothing to do with my writing or my work. But I want you, and all of the hate-spewers on here, to know that even when you disagree with me, I am a PERSON.

      If you could find a way to speak respectfully to me, I would love to hear what you have to say. As it stands, I *cannot* hear you because you *told me you would leave me to die*. Would you listen to the legitimate arguments of someone who said that?

      I’m not even hurt by what you said, I’m significantly stronger than that. But I want you to see that where you may have had the opportunity to help me grow in a way, you instead made me think badly about you and discount any important thing I may have been able to learn from.

      • Lisa Hickey says:

        Bravo, Joanna!

      • He used dramatic language to illustrate his point, and I’ll admit it’s over the top but I am really not surprised by it given how many women and even men have tried to justify misandry. What’s worse is they pick and choose the stats to believe and ignore the others which suggest people are safer with strangers than their friends and family.

        No one is obligated to help if they feel at risk or threatened, if he views someone as a bigot who is adding to the culture that is harming him and doesn’t wish to help them at all, can you really blame him? You speak from a place of privilege where female trust is a given with children, so you may not truly understand how offensive it is to profile men as less trustworthy than women but countless comments here illustrate it. His point was also most likely sarcastic but if you read it carefully you might pickup something here, men are now much more reluctant to help out especially with kids. ht tp://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,190586,00.html – This is what happens when you start telling people men are less trustworthy.

        Advocating to your children to play the odds/numbers would mean you would forfeit the ability to care for them due to the danger of being around parents. So why don’t you do this if it’s in the interests of the child’s safety? This is why it’s silly to be teaching children to fear men because the odds game if played correctly would have children raised by the state with many many levels of protection mechanisms in place. Letting your children ride in the car with you is probably far more dangerous than leaving a child with a strange man, how far does this safety initiative go? Or is it only the boogiemonster strange-danger man that is the fear? Do you teach them to avoid muslims because lately they’re probably more likely to commit terrorism (though you could swap this for other religions that commit it)?

        Asking for respect as a human being whilst also advocating being suspicious of an entire gender simply because of their gender and the actions of the FEW in that gender, those men are person’s too but you aren’t affording them much respect if you perpetuate fears of them? Don’t forget to teach them to avoid 18-40 year olds which I believe would be the highest in violence stats at age of offending, so they should find a physically weak old woman to be safe with? If you want respect, you need to respect men first (and women too of course) and profiling on gender is not respect.

        Funnily enough as soon as I saw you say “But in general, your daughter should play the numbers and know that if she is going to be raped or murdered, it is most likely going to be by a man and make a choice based upon that.” it made me feel something similar to this “I’m not even hurt by what you said, I’m significantly stronger than that. But I want you to see that where you may have had the opportunity to help me grow in a way, you instead made me think badly about you and discount any important thing I may have been able to learn from.”

        • Legit points, Archy. Even if I disagree with some of them, I respect your presentation and because of that, the thoughts will germinate within me and I may come around, who knows? ;)

          I did already concede, like in the third comment up, that I should be using the term, “families with kids” over “moms with kids” in teaching my children about whom to trust were they ever lost. You guys are 100% right on that.

          • Thank-you Joanna. Hopefully more people can make small adjustments and the fear culture of men will dissipate allowing them more trust in childcare, which in turn should help reduce the gender-role pressure of work and family. :D

            • Starting to really like Archy!

              DB – No feminist humor huh? What a downer it’ll be when we take over the world!

              Mwah huh huh huh huh (that was my Mr. Burns laugh).

            • Was that sarcasm? I’m bad at detecting it:P
              I basically roll with the view of seeing the damage of too much emphasis on gender, in my world men, women, children, black, white, green blue red, etc would have adequate coverage and funding towards stopping all forms of abuse regardless of who gets it worse. The cycle of abuse can have a male be abused by a male then later goes on to abuse a female, or female abused by a female and later abuses a male, and bunch of other combinations. This basically means to stop abuse against women, we’d have to also rally together and stop it against men too and vice versa because when both genders are safer, they’re less likely as far as I know to want to harm others. So I hope people don’t think I’m trying to be all whataboutthemenz, simply i am whatabouteveryone as I don’t want any victim to suffer in silence and not have help, nor do I want perpetrators to also not have access to the support they need to lower recidivism. This goes for all abuse, crime, mental and physical health, everything. Cover everyone so no one get’s left behind. :)

            • Joanna Schroeder says:

              Yes Sarcasm: Feminists taking over the world and Mr. Burns laugh.

              No Sarcasm: Starting to really like you!

              And for what you say above as far as caring for all victims and preventing all abuse and that being a mutually-beneficial system, I agree wholeheartedly. And though I knew it intrinsically, I hadn’t yet found a way to express it, or fully even understand it before you said it. I said that over in LIsa’s piece where you commented the same ideas.

            • That’s the problem we’ve got now in we’ve heard violence against women by men sooo long and sooo much it’s given a perception that the opposite direction happens so little that it’s insignificant, and other variables. It’s basically hearing under half of the whole picture if it’s male attacker female victim, we know that beating a dog can increase the risk of it biting back without battign an eyelid but that same principle can be applied to humans.

              In my family I knew of a lot of violence in my uncles, one in particular would beat his kids, throw them against the wall, girls n boys, to the point one of his boys aimed a fully loaded .308 at him when he was holding his daughter against a wall and I thought omg what a monster. Then I heard about his father, my grandpa and he was even worse, the violence he put my uncles and I think even my aunt through must have been extreme. And no doubt my great grandpa probably beat the hell out of his kids.

              Thing is my dad was the baby of the family, so his brothers were in their teens and pretty much would have killed grandpa if he ever laid a finger on him, they would speak up if my dad did something that would get him in trouble and the brothers would take the blame, and thus the punishment. He was the only one to goto college and when he had us he NEVER EVER abused us, the cycle was broken.

              My abuse mainly came from severe bullying in schools, as an adult I have had time to reflect and my bullies were most likely abused at home as they have troubled homes. I see this cycle of violence and abuse so often, but I rarely ever hear about stopping this violence against men yet I know 100% in my heart that if we could step in and say No, violence against men is wrong, even women can do severe damage to men that we would see a major increase in how many men come forward and seek help for abuse they suffer.

              It may still be that more men commit abuse but it will at least teach us as in society that women’s violence isn’t to be overlooked, males are not invincible and we need to realize everyone can be violent, everyone can be a victim. I hear so commonly that men are stronger than women, when women talk about male abuse many will say the typical slap or light abuse vs the heavy abuse from men as if women are incapable of doing major damage. A single punch, or slap can put someone unconscious, they can fall and hit their head and bam, they’re dead. The psychological damage of even light slaps, punchs, biting, etc can be much worse than the few bruises n scars.

              It’s absolutely vital that people understand that physical impact isn’t the only harm. The psychological bullying affected me 100x more than the physical, being through quite a bit of therapy I’ve finally realized how dangerous words alone can be, stick n stones may break my bones but words can definitely cause people to hate themselves, or others (history is full of people using words alone to encourage violence), and these effects can stay with someone lifelong especially if they have no help. It helped cause a social anxiety disorder which made me fear everyone, keep me away from others quite a lot and made it very hard to trust and have any friends let alone partners. I am a very tall and very large male, I’ve been told I look very physically intimidating but truth be told I get quite nervous (a lot more in the past) around even very small women, I didn’t fear they would attack me physically, I feared they would cut me down with words or worse….become my friend and later abuse that trust. Goes to show that even the biggest man can be living a life totally in fear.

              Thank-you though for seeing it. It means a lot when others understand this cycle of abuse harms us all regardless of who abuses who.

            • Lisa Hickey says:

              Archy, would you like to write a post about your experience? We’d love to have you contribute if you would be willing. I appreciate your comments quite a bit. Email me lisa at goodmenproject dot com if interested. thanks.

            • Hey Archy, that good guy I wrote about in the original piece, Jacob, is currently working with a musician who was also bullied as a kid. He is writing an album all about the scars of that abuse and how he overcame it. I think even something small like that – activism through music – can change a kid’s life. To hear what pain you cause someone when you commit violence like that, the harm you cause when you allow it or discount it, and also for the kid (or adult man) to hear a successful, tough guy say “hey, this happened to me, too, and I’m a surviving, just gives people hope.

              And you speaking out about it now, talking about that cycle, those are where real changes come from, I believe. Even if just on an case-by-case basis.

            • I’ll possibly do it when I can remember more of it to give a better understanding, it amazes me that 10 years later I still remember things that seem new. I guess trauma likes to block itself out.

              @Joanna, I totally agree. I really hope to see both men and women, victims and abusers to write down their experiences and hopefully lend aid to more study into the field. I still find people who are shocked to learn women can be abusive and men as victims, it’s clearly indicative of how silent some can be.

              To be honest this is probably the first place I’ve ever read men open up on abuse, Especially with female abusers which totally rocks the conventional boat and the fact that men and women have opened up is very refreshing and encouraging to see. I searched around for quite a while to find somewhere that I, as a male, would be able to read about other men’s and talk about my own experiences. To be able to talk about women’s issues and men’s issues to me is very important, the cross gender issues like abuse where on some sites either focus solely on women, or men. It’s extremely inspiring to see women speak up on men’s issues, men speak up on women’s issues and also their own genders respectively and I think it’s a very important thing that needs to happen more. When we both see how we both are affected, we can actually stop the silly gender wars and fight together.

            • Lisa Hickey says:

              I am right there with you on this Archy. Thank you!

        • DavidByron says:

          You’re an iFeminist?

      • DavidByron says:

        I am not the one spewing hate. You are. You simply refuse to accept that fact. Plenty of people have tried to tell you in a more polite way Joanna. You ignored them all. I thought maybe a more emotional approach might reach you. At least you reacted to it. Perhaps that is progress. Maybe you at least having finally figured out that something you are saying is making people angry? But you are still deep in denial. It can’t be me you say to yourself. It must be this other guy. And all the other guys.

        I would love to hear what you have to say.

        Joanna, you’ve already heard what we have to say.

  26. David, take a deep breath and relax.

  27. Uncle Woofie says:

    “My father, without naming it, understood that in Rape Culture, he was presumed guilty despite being completely well-intended. He was willing to shoulder that burden and wasn’t angry about not being innately trusted. ”

    I made that point in comments behind BOTH the articles Mrs. Schroeder referenced. Including steps to simply “defuse” concerns over help offered by an unknown, lone male with at least SOME style and grace.

    Let it be known though, that I despise the term “rape culture”. It is an ugly, desperate term for an easily understandable concern for all women’s safety from either gender’s reasoned viewpoint.

    However, other than that, Mrs. Schroeder’s article was a breeze of fresh air over issues surrounding “good male comportment” strategies as well as “confident female behavior” by way of her pleasant story of an unexpected, unknown male that followed simple, common sense “Rules of Engagement”, resulting in a pleasant, delightfully unexpected casual lunch encounter.

    Now, SEE? This is the kinda thing we should ALL be striving in this here joint.

    • Joanna Schroeder says:

      Thanks Uncle Woolfie! And I’ve enjoyed all your commentary. Would love to work with you someday and completely understand your sentiments about the term Rape Culture. I, too, don’t love it, but I’m not sure of a great synonym for this phrase. Completely open to brainstorming a new phrase with you.

      • Uncle Woofie says:

        “male threat culture”….will keep trying onna back burner…I wanna drive a stake through this one REAL bad.

        • Uncle Woofie says:

          I’m back…

          I batted that comment out real quick…as a matter of fact TOO quick and too tense for the kind, warm response you gave me, Miss Joanna ( a term of cordial affection, forgive me).

          This seems to be a trademark that the entire staff and now some of its major contributors have seen fit to grace me with. This goes all the way up to Lisa Hickey & particularly Ryan, the managing editor, has given a guy that dropped in here like a rock, bitchin’ about no permanent “divorce” section…

          I think you should know that I’ve been eyeing them “twitter debates”…haven’t read one yet much less participated, but I will..and soon.

          New suggestion: “physical threat culture”…although my first re-name attempt (male threat culture) is beginning to grow on me. It may be three words rather than two, but I still maintain that ANYTHING (I WILL track down how to use italics in these responses, so help me) is better than “rape culture”

          Since I don’t wanna get in the bad habit of cross-posting stuff from other responses I’ve made, please view the ones I made at both Mr. Schwyzer’s and Miss Lisa’s articles that you mentioned for a better explanation of how I feel about dealing with this important issue.

      • Simple question
        Why does female vulnerability translate into male accusation
        If my presence as a man causes you to feel vulnerable, how am I to know that
        and respond appropriately. If I default to accepting a womans violent definition of me
        why would I want to be around women at all, doesnt it just make me vulnerable to your fears, assertions and eventual accusations. If your fears and beliefs are based on statistics do they decline when statistics do.

        • DavidByron says:

          A lot of feminists are sex segregationists. They want to divide men and women so they never meet up. So they spend a lot of time sewing fear and hate. Your response is perfectly as expected I guess.

    • ““My father, without naming it, understood that in Rape Culture, he was presumed guilty despite being completely well-intended. He was willing to shoulder that burden and wasn’t angry about not being innately trusted. ”

      Then your father had been brainwashed and sadly failed to realize it. Being presumed guilty is NEVER acceptable and should NEVER be permitted to go unchallenged.

      Most men are simply not going to accept being treated as second-class citizens (or worse, criminals) on the basis of their gender. If feminists were still concerned with equality and justice, they wouldn’t accept this situation either. Instead, many seem to take a perverse delight in promoting such toxic attitudes.

  28. Joanna, your article basically comes down to saying that it’s perfectly moral to be a racist or a sexist if you can get some personal advantage from it for yourself. Do you think that is a fair summary of your reasoning in the article? And if it is not please say how your reasoning is different.

    Do you realise that such a perverse logic would undermine just about every advance that liberals have ever made in fighting prejudices against just about any group? Endless examples could be made but let’s pick one you might “get”. Currently the law says that an employer cannot refuse to hire someone based on their gender. Your logic says that law should be overturned. Let’s say you want a job with an employer and because you are a woman they think to themselves,

    Well this is a woman and she might get herself pregnant and drop out of work costing me money to find some new person. I don’t want to take that risk. it may be a tiny risk. It may be that not all women are going to do that. Maybe hardly any women would do that but with a man i can be certain it will not happen.

    Do you support changing the law so employers can always refuse to hire women if they feel such a tiny advantage might be in their interests?

  29. DavidByron says:

    Btw? If anyone actually thinks that feminism is an equality movement still, please tell me why I just had to define “discrimination” to a feminist and tell her why it was immoral. Please tell me why a member of a so-called equality movement can come up with an argument like, “but treating men worse than women is OK if I get an advantage out of it” and have no clue at all why anyone might think that was wrong.

    SERIOUSLY?
    Come on this is just farcical now.

    • Not being trusted by someone who doesn’t know you isn’t discrimination. Taking a ride from someone isn’t giving them something (like a job, or scholarship or what have you). Giving a ride to someone isn’t a right or even a privilege. It’s doing a favor, and missing out on being able to do a favor for someone does NOT make anyone disadvantaged in any way.

      It would be nice if women did not need to weigh and judge and worry about whether someone offering to do a favor might have ulterior motives. It would be nice, but the world being what it is, they do have to. Being concerned about your own safety is not, cannot, should not be comparable to being offered a competitive advantage.

      • “Discrimination is the prejudicial treatment of an individual based on their membership in a certain group or category. It involves the actual behaviors towards groups such as excluding or restricting members of one group from opportunities that are available to another group.”

        “Educating” others that they should be more fearful of one group to the point it has very real impacts on them in society is discrimination. You don’t have to take a ride from anyone, but the mere fact you use prejudice to profile that person IS the problem. Eg, fearing ALL muslims over terrorism, fearing ALL men as abusers, teaching children that men are LESS trustworthy than females because let’s face it, that’s exactly what people are doing.

      • DavidByron says:

        Not being trusted by someone who doesn’t know you isn’t discrimination

        So you think it is OK to eg. follow black women around your shop because they might be shoplifters? Or arrest Latino looking people because they just might be illegals? Or stop and frisk black people in New York because they might be selling drugs? Or tell gay men they can’t work with children because they might be pedophiles?

        Just because the bigotry is your bigotry doesn’t make it OK.

        • All those things you list are aggressive, overt acts someone takes against another individual. They are not decisions made by someone to protect their own safety. Those are actions taken with the backing of an entire power structure that you expect to back you up if you find the person has done something wrong, not the action of someone on their own (a person who if they WERE sexually assaulted, is likely to find their lives significantly worse if they DID report it to that same power structure). Equating “not getting in the car with a stranger” with tactics that I can only describe as at best “abuse of power” (and several are actually “police harrassment”) is just….failure.

          Is there potentially harm in the idea that unknown males represent more harm than unknown females? I don’t know anyone who would argue with that. Is it (for now) a necessity? Ditto. Is there a HUGE distinction between institutional injustice represented by things like racial profiling and stranger danger paranoia and alarmism in schools and the job market compared to measures taken by individuals to cut down on their risk? Obviously. Is anyone here SERIOUSLY equating the two?

          Until and unless the world changes, the potential harm of not making those calculations far far outweighs not making them. The woman who goes into a dicey situation and is assaulted will surely be clucked at (and probably a lot worse) for NOT turning down that ride.

          • DavidByron says:

            You are not the first person to justify their prejudices.

            All those things you list are aggressive, overt acts

            You think prejudice is alright as long as it is subtle? And telling your kids to fear a certain minority group counts as “subtle”?

            They are not decisions made by someone to protect their own safety

            They all are. Icky people are frightening. They have cooties. You just don’t know what they will do. Fear is always somewhere around. But in any case would you say it’s OK for someone to teach kids that black people were dangerous? Or Jews? Or gay people? Hypothetically of course. I can’t imagine anyone ever telling kids that gay people were dangerous can you? But if they did of course where’s the harm in that?

            Those are actions taken with the backing of an entire power structure

            The middle two were. Immoral actions by the state are especially dangerous. Do I take it then that you would say it would be wrong for the state to make a PA film that expressed your own views — because your views are immoral? But you should be entitled to be immoral in your own private life? I agree that making a law to ban evil “thoughts” is a bad idea. But it is a good idea to tell people to quit being prejudiced.

            I’m glad that you recognise that what you are advocating is both discrimination and harmful. You’re simply saying you have a right to discriminate against men and hurt them. I agree you have the right. And I have the right to point out you are sexist.

            Btw – I’m guessing you’re a feminist and you’re all about gender equality?

            • It’s none of your business what my political identity is (of course I’m a feminist). That’s a deflection (as is calling me a sexist). The fact is, this entire argument by you and others is one giant deflection. If you can find one single “wrong”, “bad”, or “sexist” thing to point to, well, then all the arguments are invalid, “look, someone discriminated about the poor menz.”

              The sheer fact that this is the thing you harp on about puts you on the wrong side of the argument. Oppression, prejudice and discrimination are big, institutional issues that need to be addressed on a global level. Noone has yet addressed HOW women taking measures to protect themselves would harm a man. When I said that there’s “potentially harm” in the idea that an unknown male is more dangerous than an unknown female, for me it’s kind of an academic thing. I would prefer to live in a world where that’s not necessary. In reading many discussions of this kind of thing NOONE has ever demonstrated what the actual, real world, relevant harm is. I’ve been curious why that is. Is it that there is none?

              Or is it that discussing how being feared and mistrusted is harmful requires that a man reveal feelings and emotions in a public venue (much the way it does for a woman to reveal she has been assaulted, or is fearful of being assaulted does)? Could it be that women have found a way to lay what’s inside them in public and found that ultimately it was a good thing (even though it was scary and sometimes hurt), but men have not yet done so?

              It’s OK. You can have feelings. Some people will respect them, and listen, and learn. Some won’t; fuck ‘em.

            • DavidByron says:

              Of course the harm is “an academic thing” to you. Your white female privilege means you will never suffer from this sort of prejudice. You’re at the top of the hierarchy. Instead you are the one with power hurting other people.

              So now you are asking what is the big deal about discrimination? What is the harm in hurting people from minority groups? Why is everyone down on me using my privileges to step on peoples necks?

              The answer to this requires you learn a skill called empathy.
              It is not my place to teach you that.
              I can’t do it because I had to be mean to you.

              I can only suggest you read more of the stories about the lives of other people, and especially the people you are hurting. (Gee. Wonder where you could find a web site featuring stories about men?) However I can assure you that what you are doing is very hurtful and does have real life consequences for your victims and for others.

            • Deflect, deflect, attack, make stuff up, provoke, make a nice big strawman, set it on fire (your *victims*, really?). I’m not going to rise to it, because I know you don’t know the slightest thing about me. I can tell something about you though. You like to paint yourself as the heavy. At least twice in this thread.

              I’m not seeing any substantive contribution to a discussion on whether there’s a real issue here or just hot air. When feminists (and others who value human rights) discuss institutional oppression, discrimination, prejudice, there’s very real explanations of WHY this hurts people, and HOW it could be better. I maintain there’s 2 options: Either this is not a real issue, or you’re not willing to say how and why it’s a real issue. Which, when it comes down to it, was the same problem with Matlack’s post on Dudes.

              The only thing I’d respond to further is something that addresses that point.

            • When feminists … discuss institutional oppression, discrimination, prejudice
              I don’t think I’ve ever seen that. Feminists just blather on about “the patriarchy” or “male privilege” or “rape culture” and never have any actual issues. I keep asking people to name a specifically feminist issue and I never get an answer.

              I’m not going to give you an answer because there’s a dozen other places on this very thread where people have already done it for you. To say nothing of the rest of the web site.

              I’m not going to give an answer because to any human being with a shred of compassion or empathy it’s obvious. Might as well ask me to explain why calling Jews tight-fisted smelly hook-nosed cheats could possibly be considered racist. I mean how could that possibly harm anyone? Right? It’s not like I say that to a Jew. I just tell my kids to watch out for Jews is all. How can that be racist?

            • J.G. te Molder says:

              Institution discrimination? You mean affirmative action quotas that have women hired as fire fighters even when they can’t make the physical requirements? No, I don’t mean the male physical requirements, I’m talking about the lowered female physical requirements (which incidentally is already getting women hired that are physically incapable of performing the job), they still have to be hired. As a result endangering the lives of her mostly male colleagues (but they’re just men right), the people she’s supposed to save, and her own.

              I’m sure you and other feminists are fighting against this institutionalized discrimination, right?

              Or how about the women’s health departments everywhere, including the friggin’ army where they are but a minority; yet, not a single one for men.

              I’m sure you and other feminists are fighting to either have these abolished, or have an equal number of men’s health departments, right? At the bare minimum in the army?

              How about joint custody for men? The women get punished with equal sentences to men? That a paternity test is taking standardly during child support cases, hell, that judges can order such a test and that women be punished for their attempt to defraud men by claiming he’s the father, when he isn’t?

              Oh, no, wait, the feminist organization NOW is campaigning against paternity tests on the grounds it would significantly hurt women. The feminists acknowledging the massive institutionalized discrimination against men, and that a large amount of women defraud men, and campaigning that women should continue to be able to do that.

              And those are just the tips of the iceberg.

              It seems it’s women that are the beneficiaries of massive institutionalized discrimination against men, and that women and feminists wield it. And that no, they are not fighting against it, they’re fighting for even more of it.

            • The harms. Men less likely to offer help, a young child died and the last person to see the child was a man who was afraid that offering help would have him seen as pedo/childabducting monster and the child later drowned (I believe he only noticed her alone, not in or near water until it was too late). Severe lack of male representation in childcare and primary/preschool jobs, even the Scouts I believe are having a hard time finding adults. Male parents getting dirty looks at playgrounds, accusations of abuse being enough to destroy a career and reputation, airlines forcing men to move if they are seated next to minor’s not in their care, and probably a lot more.

            • All those come from women being wary of getting in a car with a stranger or not smiling at every guy they see? Does that seem likely?

              Or maybe they are caused by institutional paranoia (companies do not want to be sued for a real or imagined abuse case) and conservative social values (childcare is an acceptable menial job for women, and women who are afraid of men will be more constrained in their behavior and options).

              Which one of those is more universal?

              There are plenty of women who would behave cautiously when alone with a stranger, but would also have no problem letting a man care for their kids. Their caution surely isn’t what’s driving stranger danger paranoia. What is?

            • You really can’t be serious can you? It’s not the fact women aren’t getting into cars or smiling at strangers, it’s the reason WHY they aren’t if it’s towards men only that matters. I don’t expect anyone to jump into strangers cars, but I also don’t expect people to start profiling most likely abusers whilst conveniently ignoring some hard hitting truths.

              “There are plenty of women who would behave cautiously when alone with a stranger, but would also have no problem letting a man care for their kids. ”
              Read the comments and even articles on the goodmenproject, we have people advocating play the odds, teach your kids to be more fearful of men. The fact that companies are taking this paranoia into account and don’t want to be sued are directly helping to reinforce the paranoia. Humans probably have always feared strangers and the unknown, moral panics have come about over witchs, pedophiles, communists, terrorists and caution turns into paranoia. If we have more and more people educating others that when they need help they need to goto a woman first, it reinforces the paranoia.

              The fact there are plenty of women and men who do have a problem with men caring for their kids, it’s an increasing problem. Yes there are other social factors such as belief childcare is a woman’s job that help keep gender roles in place, but the fact is the paranoia is caused by releasing stats of violence and rape against women and kids, but either not studying male victimization or not talking about the stats that show up to 20% of child sex abusers are women for instance, or how mothers are most likely to kill children.

              If we talk only about one side of the abuse equation and only talk about the bad one gender does, we can easily create suspicion around men for instance. If I went on a crusade and told everyone that children are most likely to die by the hands of their mother, told everyone, had major campaigns and equal rights movements to help spread the message do you think women would be trusted with children as much as men who apparently are less likely to kill the child?

              Our culture seems to be quite fear based, sensationalist and negative headlines are the popular ones, ARE YOUR CHILDREN SAFE? FIND OUT AT 7pm! ht tp://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/3101958/Paedophile-hysteria-preventing-men-applying-to-work-in-primary-schools.html Here is some info on it, just google Pedophile Paranoia.

              It’s a really easy concept to understand. Advocate that people should be more trusting of a female automatically assumes the male is less trustworthy, given the climate of fear we live in this results in paranoia and males find it harder to get into roles with children for instance. The other problem with stranger danger as I’ve said many times already is that strangers are less likely to harm you than people you know, so if it’s about safety why aren’t we telling people to avoid their friends n family like they’re boogiemen?

            • I stand by what I originally said. Feminists object to people (I’ve only seen presumably male posters saying this, but obviously that’s not verifiable) characterizing certain actions as “sexist” or “prejudiced”. Those actions were specifically things like “not getting into a car with a strange male” (in this article) or “not smiling at every passing male” (in Hugo’s article). Presumably we can see the difference between those things and things like “teaching children to fear adult males”, yes?

              Also, we can see the difference between an adult woman and a child? Between institutions and individuals? Between one person’s safety concerns and a pattern of injustice?

              Pretending we can’t, and ad hominem attacks add nothing to the conversation. If the honest desire is truly equal rights for humans, then whole swathes of people should not be vilified and insulted for choosing to try to make the world better for people of all genders. Accusing an entire movement of bad faith and lack of empathy accomplishes exactly zero. Oh wait, it does accomplish something. It pushes us further apart, and makes the divide bigger.

            • I support and expect feminism to exist, we need masculism and feminism to work together along with the various racial rights groups, etc. The combined effort becomes equalism.

              “Accusing an entire movement of bad faith and lack of empathy accomplishes exactly zero.” Exactly, and accusing and treating men to be of bad character in profiling them as less trustworthy than a female accomplishes not zero, but a negative effect on males in our culture. It also causes a backlash by people offended by the notion of men being more dangerous so lets teach our kids to avoid them, or teach women should be afraid of men. Plenty of evidence to be afraid of women, even adult men should be afraid of adult women but what exactly will this fear encourage? There is a difference between teaching caution, and teaching to avoid a gender or race. Can’t you see this is similar to what you just said on accusing the whole on bad faith and lacking empathy?

            • DavidByron says:

              Do any feminists exist who say men should be treated as well as women. If there were any would they be savagely attacked by the others?

              As the decent people abandon the feminist movement the remainder is getting more and more obvious.

      • John Anderson says:

        Actually, there was a group of people in my old neighborhood; I think they were Mormons, who told me that they were required by their faith to do good deeds. I don’t remember if it was monthly or weekly. I’m just bringing this up because denying someone the opportunity to do a good deed, may very well be denying them an opportunity to practice their faith. I also heard about a group of monks who go around begging to give people an opportunity to do a good deed. I don’t know if that would rise to the level of discrimination, but to some people it’s more than just doing someone a favor.

  30. Recently, the site had an article about professional men not being willing to act as mentors to female subordinates because of the fear that they’d be accused of inappropriate conduct.

    Here, the article essentially gives another example of “women are going to treat men as attackers by default.” Again, the rational man’s conclusion would be the same: avoid all contact. In this case, smart men should refuse to offer assistance to ANY woman, again for fear that they would be treated as an attacker.

    Curiously, though, the mentorship article still managed to blame men for not ignoring such fears and doing what would help women _regardless_ of how they’re treated in return. Would this author say the same? Would most feminists?

Trackbacks

  1. [...] and I first met online at The Good Men Project in the comments section of a piece I wrote called The (Quiet) FeministRevolution. I was pretty sure I had written something so deeply based in common [...]

  2. [...] and I first met online at The Good Men Project in the comments section of a piece I wrote called The (Quiet) FeministRevolution. I was pretty sure I had written something so deeply based in common [...]

  3. [...] and I first met online at The Good Men Project in the comments section of a piece I wrote called The (Quiet) FeministRevolution. I was pretty sure I had written something so deeply based in common [...]

Speak Your Mind