In Rape Culture, All Men Are Guilty Until Proven Innocent

Why do good men have to pay for other men’s bad behavior? Hugo Schwyzer explains the answer he learned in his first Women’s Studies class.

Exactly 25 years ago, I sat both frustrated and excited through my first Women’s Studies class at Berkeley. I was one of perhaps four men in a class of 30, and I was (shock of all shocks) among the most vocal. A few weeks into the semester, I remember one morning blurting out something like the following:

Why is it that men are always guilty until proven innocent? I know there are some “bad guys” out there, but it is incredibly hurtful to me that women won’t smile at me in the hallways or on the street because they have lumped me in with all the others! I get so tired of paying the price—in terms of women’s mistrust—for other men’s failures and betrayals and bad behavior. Why can’t women see what a good guy I am?

I was 19 and lonely, but I was also eager to “get” feminism because I believed it was my duty to do so. More importantly, I believed that there was something there for me within feminism—something I could learn that would make me a happier person. But all I was feeling was guilty and angry.

My fellow students were patient; no one verbally attacked me for my outburst. But the women in the class, led by the professor, helped me to see several things I wasn’t able or willing yet to see.

First of all, the obvious point is that women’s intuition, while not entirely the stuff of myth, is not so powerful that it can automatically separate “good guys” from the bad. As they told me, no woman can walk down the street and as she passes a man, know with certainty that he isn’t a threat. Given the high incidence of rape and assault and harassment and other forms of abuse, a woman would be a fool to leave herself continually vulnerable. The old adage “Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me” applies. When a simple smile is so frequently misunderstood and construed as a sexual invitation, women generally do have to operate on the assumption that men are guilty until proven innocent.

I’ve never forgotten what I learned that day.

When I hear men complaining about women’s suspicion, I am reminded of my white friends who are bewildered and indignant when people of color point out their white privilege to them. Men who grumble about being “guilty until proven innocent” are demanding to be seen as individuals, separate from their perceived sex and the history that goes with it. That’s a tempting but unreasonable demand to make.

While “innocent until proven guilty” is an excellent guideline for courtroom proceedings, it doesn’t translate nearly as effectively into public life and relations between the sexes. When men gripe that women are suspicious of their intentions merely because they are men, they are forcing women into the role of the district attorney, the one shouldered with the burden of proving guilt. In a society where women, rather than men, are overwhelmingly the victims of harassment and assault, those who have suffered most are the ones being asked to lay aside their prior experience and knowledge and approach each new male in their lives with a blank slate, free from judgment. That’s a hell of a weight to ask women to carry, and a hell of a risk to ask them to take, again and again and again.

In our culture, where rape and harassment and abuse are so common, men have lost the right (if it ever existed) to insist that women should be able to differentiate (in a matter of seconds) between the harmless and the threatening. A man is entitled to a presumption of innocence from a jury in a courtroom, but not from his classmate with whom he tries to strike up what she ought to know is just an innocent conversation.

Is it frustrating to be viewed with suspicion merely because of one’s sex? Heck yes. (Is it frustrating to be viewed as a sexual object merely because one is young and female? Ask around.) Men ought to be angry that they need to “prove their harmlessness.” Indeed, they ought to be enraged! But our anger is rightly directed not at women who have been the victims (individually and collectively) of predatory males, but at those men who have “poisoned the well” for everyone else. Rather than demand that women “smile more” or “trust more” or “just know that I’m a good guy,” men need to channel their frustration at being “pre-judged” into a commitment to end what it is that causes women’s suspicion in the first place.

Holding other men accountable, challenging sexist and objectifying language and behavior in yourself and in other males (whether or not women are around) is the single most effective thing men can do to change the culture of “guilty until proven innocent.” Rape, assault, and harassment are allowed to flourish not merely through the actions of a few “bad apples,” but through the unwillingness of the “nice guys” to challenge other men. Silence is, in practical terms, tacit consent and approval.

There’s more to being a “good guy” than not raping women. Good guys hold themselves and other men accountable, in public and in private. That’s a high standard to meet, particularly for the young. But it’s only by meeting that standard that men can help to change the culture. And until we do that, our feelings of guilt will not be entirely undeserved.

—Photo aeneastudio/Flickr

About Hugo Schwyzer

Hugo Schwyzer has taught history and gender studies at Pasadena City College since 1993, where he developed the college's first courses on Men and Masculinity and Beauty and Body Image. He serves as co-director of the Perfectly Unperfected Project, a campaign to transform young people's attitudes around body image and fashion. Hugo lives with his wife, daughter, and six chinchillas in Los Angeles. Hugo blogs at his website

Comments

  1. More misandrist nonsense from Hugo. Why am I not surprised? Rape, harassment, and abuse are NOT so common. Should I be suspicious of every single person I pass by on the street? After all, the street is a dangerous place here in NYC. Any random guy could pull out a gun and shoot me because muggings and gun violence are so common.

    I know you write this junk for the hits — the same reason it gets published — and the ensuing comment drama from people like myself and every other reasonable person in the world who calls you out on your incredibly blatant misandry, but seriously. You do more damage to the “feminist” cause than you probably imagine, and you cause incredible harm to any impressionable boy who may be reading this. I truly wish that no teenage boys are coming to this site looking for guidance on how to be good men and reading your articles, because if they read your stuff and take it to heart, they’re ruined. Is it your goal to ruin boys? We should call you Hugo Sandusky.

    • “You do more damage to the “feminist” cause than you probably imagine. . .”

      Not really. Feminism’s reputation is very well established and known. He is simply writing what has been taught in feminism/Gender/Women’s Studies classes for decades. These pieces simply remind the reader that feminism’s well known and well worn hatred of maleness and masculinity is still alive and well.

      • “well worn hatred of maleness and masculinity is still alive and well” … Not because of feminism. My mother is utterly anti-feminist and believes that men are better than women. She tells me every time I walk out the door not to dress “too pretty” because men will stare and rape, that it is their ‘natural instinct’ and never to go out alone at night or travel. I’m a feminist because my mother is this way and I don’t want to believe in her generalizations about women and men.

        • Basically, she is holding me accountable for whatever happens to me in regards to rape, sexual advances, etc, even if I am doing nothing wrong but just simply for being a female or the way I look.

        • Mina, according to contemporary feminists, and I’m thinking specifically of Amanda Marcotte here, men deserve to be prosecuted and jailed for crimes they literally did not commit. Don’t believe me? Look up Marcotte’s 2008 comments on the Duke lacrosse team where she stated that they deserved punishment fully a year after they had been vindicated.

          I’m sorry, but the contemporary feminist movement is all about putting men down by any means necessary.

        • So, your mother believes that men are superior to women but also believes that all men will rape women if they choose to “dress pretty.” The only way to reconcile those two things is if she believes that forcible rape is superior behaviour on the part of humans.

          It’s safe to say that your mother’s thinking is not representative of anyone but herself. It’s also safe to say, based on the evidence of this article, that is it only feminists who stereotype men, assuming that we are all rapists.

    • MorgainePendragon says:

      “Rape, harassment, and abuse are NOT so common.”

      yeah, they really are:

      “1 in 4 women surveyed by the government say they were violently attacked by their husbands or boyfriends.”

      http://news.yahoo.com/survey-1-4-women-attacked-intimate-partner-225334654.html

      And this study doesn’t even include stranger and acquaintance rape, assault and harassment.

      • Woops! You’re not Amanda Marcotte! With that said, my point remains the same. I swear, it is trendy for women to claim they were assaulted. The way men are pilloried left right and center is truly TRULY disgusting. TRULY disgusting. We have a feminist machine that crusades against men, and tries to strangle boys in the crib. Then we have incredibly biased studies, we have people like Hugo, and a complicit media that spits out the feminist “MEN BAD WOMEN GOOD” meme and how every man is one drink away from raping some woman. This constant bombardment from every single direction destroys impressionable young men and boys and turns them into involuntarily celibate, depressed, and lonely people who don’t contribute as much to society as they could because of people like you and Hugo. Then, the shy men who took to heart every bit of bullshit nonsense spewed by people like you “don’t smile at women, you’re a creep, make sure you don’t do ANYTHING that might make her uncomfortable, don’t assume anything, don’t try anything without permission, etc, etc, etc.” Now we’ve got men who are trying to “do the right thing” by not making eye contact, not smiling, won’t go in for a kiss, etc, and they are stuck being involuntarily celibate because they’re doing everything every feminist has said they should do to be “good men.”

        I have said it before, and I will say it again; feminism is the biggest drag on our society. Somehow, feminism gets a free pass to use the rare bad apple to slime a whole gender. Are all men genocidal maniacs too because there have been a few of those too? What about murderers? What about cheaters? What about psychopaths?

        I can’t even enunciate my level of disgust.

        • Peter Houlihan says:

          Biggest drag on our society? I think you’re overstating its influence, aswell as ignoring its positive achievements. What about equal voting rights? Was that holding society back?

        • Peter Houlihan says:

          Biggest drag on our society? I think you’re overstating its influence, aswell as ignoring its positive achievements. What about equal voting rights? Was that holding society back?

          • Peter, while I think poverty is actually the biggest drag on society, I think you are failing to recognize that Feminism is neither a monolith (a mistake made by many of those in the anti-feminism camp), nor has Feminism been consistent in content, message, or proponents over time. Feminism is often referred to in ‘waves’ (currently considered to be third or fourth wave I think). While Feminists did help establish equal voting rights, while they were doing it (at least here in Canada) they were also against voting rights for the poor and the not-white. Not exactly the paragons of virtue they are often portrayed as.
            The point I am making is that nothing, not Feminism, not Patriarchy, nothing is completely without blind-spots or extremists. Nothing is perfect. Feminism has problems, not the first of which is that it is internally inconsistent and has been sometimes deployed not as an ontology of freedom, but as a cudgel of hate and intolerance. There is a strange current within feminism that acts out in the same sexist and gendered manner that Feminism supposedly arose to oppose. In many ways some feminists have become the thing they claim to hate. Does this make Feminism something that should be completely derided and dismissed? Nope. The same goes for the acts of some men being used to tar and feather all men. Undeserved shame and self-loathing is not going to make for better men any more than it made for better women.

            • DavidByron says:

              Is the KKK a monolith?

              I don’t think it is unreasonable to characterise a movement by its dominant position on issues. Nobody is forced to call themselves a feminist. If someone chooses to do so, all the while knowing its reputation and the positions on gender that many of its members take, then it is reasonable to make certain assumptions about that person. At the very least it says they are tolerant of those attitudes.

            • Exactly

            • Unfortunately, given that humanism doesn’t mean the equality of all humans, there are few terms truly egalitarian people can attach themselves to. Some self-stated feminists (probably?) work equally hard for mens rights, especially in issues such as child-rearing and child custody, and emotional abuse against men. Perhaps we can think of a nice, new word for a unified approach to gender equality? :)

            • DavidByron says:

              How about just “equality”?

            • DavidByron says:
              December 18, 2011 at 2:44 am
              How about just “equality”?
              ———-

              This is a good question, but surprisingly so far I have not noticed that GMP-moderators are deleting my comments or banning my ID despite I am standing firmly with the MRAs out of many reasons.

              I also noticed, that some few contributions were made by MRA-friendly authors, like Paul Elam or Toysoldier, despite feminists were complaining so much to the GMP for publishing their articles.

              I think, most MRAs are not really interested to write even a short comment as they mistrust the GMP and see it as a feminist outpost, questioning the purpose of this website.

              I also think, in return, the GMP is not much interested either to receive articles from MRAs as they are not politically correct. MRAs have their own forums and blogs and females are welcome to sign up with us anytime and to check out what kind of people we really are.

              The Western society, especially those in USA and UK accepts only women as victims and men as aggressors. See Hugo’s articles. That’s plainly wrong, but so much about ‘equality’.

            • “I don’t think it is unreasonable to characterise a movement by its dominant position on issues. ”

              Yep, but if you’re going to debate an issue, please please please do some research first :)

            • The only feminists who count are those with their hands on the legislative levers. THEY are the effective face of feminism. In my country feminist politicians interfered in data collection at government level to hide abuse and enable discrimination. They spread this discrimination like a contagion to everything they touch. The upshot is victims being laughed at and called liars by services funded by government to help victims.

              If you call yourself a feminist it is THAT basis upon which I will judge your feminism.

        • Jamie Parsons says:

          Exactly. And when the good men are too shy to do anything in case it offends a woman where do some women go anyway (once they get drunk)? To all the sleazebags and bros that do only want to use them for sex. Do women know how heartbreaking that is? When you truly love someone and do everything to keep them happy and then they go sleep around anyway? Often while parading womens rights? And then when they are inevitably hurt, they lump all men together with the ‘men are all the same line’. Honestly that is offensive, to lump us in with those losers when all we ever tried to be was caring and respectful. This attitude of some women and feminists where they seem to think that they are the only ones that gets hurt is quite annoying. It goes both ways.

          • QuantumInc says:

            Women have the right to sleep with whomever they want. The only possible exception is a committed relationship where monogamy has been established, even then it is only a crime in marriage. If you love a woman but are only friends (from HER point of view) you don’t really have a right to complain. You could give her a list of reasons not to do that, but if it is heartbreaking to you, then it is heartbreaking because she is a different person than you originally thought.

            Perhaps it is just the wording, but your post sounds like something that happened to you, but it also sounds like something a feminist would write to illustrate why men who call themselves nice are worse than typical sleazebags.

        • Julie Gillis says:

          I have no idea where this “Then, the shy men who took to heart every bit of bullshit nonsense spewed by people like you “don’t smile at women, you’re a creep, make sure you don’t do ANYTHING that might make her uncomfortable, don’t assume anything, don’t try anything without permission, etc, etc, etc.” Now we’ve got men who are trying to “do the right thing” by not making eye contact, not smiling, won’t go in for a kiss, etc, and they are stuck being involuntarily celibate because they’re doing everything every feminist has said they should do to be “good men.”” is being taught.

          It’s not being taught in my children’s schools. It wasn’t taught to my male friends. I see hundreds of kids a day on campuses around town smiling, laughing, dating, talking. I don’t see classes at the Gender Center here in town teaching that.

          It sounds like you’ve internalized some really awful rhetoric. If you truly think Hugo is saying those things, then don’t read him. Read other things. Get out in the world and expand the circles you are in so that you can find people who respond to you for who you are.

          As for being involuntarily celibate…..I don’t even know how to address that Collin. You find people you like who like you and then you move forward. But you have to believe that you are the good guy that I believe you are, and you have to actually like women. Like, like them.

          Again, i’ll ask you to dialogue with me if you want.

          • This is a telling comment from a moderator:

            It sounds like you’ve internalized some really awful rhetoric. If you truly think Hugo is saying those things, then don’t read him. Read other things.

            So when offensive language that violates the policy here is pointed out to the moderator, the response is, if you are offended by something, don’t read that person’s stuff. Does that rule apply only to feminist authors or can the rest of us expect similar latitude?

            • @DavidByron
              I don’t know, how to explain that. But it seems some certain people enjoy a certain special status with the GMP.

              In case of Hugo, it’s clear to everybody that he presents to us the ‘most extreme side of male feminism’.

              Whatever I have seen from Hugo is blaming men for all and everything while looking for excuses even for serious wrongdoings by females.

              I have never seen anything else from Hugo and in this sense the advice of this moderator is understandable. Hugo writes ONLY something like that, nothing else, and when you see something about Hugo and you are not into openly into men-blaming stuff, the best is to ignore whatever he says.

              If this advice from a moderator – not to read comments from a certain writer – is supportive for any meaningful dialog for a ‘Good Men Project’ is another matter.

            • “In case of Hugo, it’s clear to everybody that he presents to us the ‘most extreme side of male feminism’.”

              No, his views are not exteme all. Were his views extreme, feminist commenters and writers would have been renouncing them as such. However, the few if any feminists express even the slightest disagreement with his articles “men are evil and to blame for EVERYthing” philosophies, which is clear evidence that his views represent the basic textbook philosophies within feminism.

              In fact, he has written extensively his views expressed here are what he was taught in feminists/women’s studies classes and what he teaches his poor students. The good news is that the truth of what feminists truly believe, and what they learn in school, has been presented here in writing, and shows that the feminists movement means nothing but ill-will towards boys and men, and has nothing to offer toward helping men and boys improve.

            • “In case of Hugo, it’s clear to everybody that he presents to us the ‘most extreme side of male feminism’.”

              And if you forget, he’ll remind you…

          • Yeah, I see this all the time. Men who don’t have much success with women for whatever reason deciding that women are evil and taking it out on them in the form of anti-feminism. They express sentiments which make it sound like they actually hate women and have no respect for them. They state all sorts of ridiculous “facts,” only further alienating women from men in general, making us feel like men cannot understand these issues so there isn’t hop for them. And then they call themselves good guys and wonder why they aren’t having success with women.

            They’re also normally expecting women who are “out of their league” to date them rather than acknowledging the women who are attracted to them, but aren’t hot enough for them. They romanticize the fantasy of the super model who wants an overweight, unkempt guy who loves video games instead of going for an overweight, unkempt girl who loves video games. How dare a woman seek out a man who takes care of himself and has similar interests when she takes cafe of herself. They’re all just evil!

            Anyways, I’m going off on a tangent, but I find the comments on this article to be frightening. The attitudes of most of these men don’t make me want to trust men any more than I already do, and back up my feelings about men who feel entitled to sex with women with or without her consent. I don’t get what they’re trying to do here, it seems they’re only hurting themselves.

            • J.G. te Molder says:

              And more shaming language! Thank you for upholding the stereotype of feminists everywhere. They’re proud of you.

              But the first thing an MRA learns, is not care one with about what a feminist says who spends her time waxing about feelings and her feelings directed against men, as opposed to using logic and rationality and actually debates the points.

            • Shaming language is a part of feminist rhetoric. –

              As MRAs we are accustomed to such baseless and ridiculous accusations.

              MRAs, simply said, don’t care when feminists insults them. – We have our own ideas how to deal with our life and for that we do not need the ‘permission’ from feminists.

        • hahahaha,

          the hypocrisy here is amazing…

          Hugo talks down to lower status males…

          His cronies call them “Nice Guys TM.”

          It isn’t me who bragged about banging students on my desk. It isn’t me who almost killed a lovr in a drug filled rage-I couldn’t make this stuff up, just go read Mr. Skeezer’s blog….

        • “…are stuck being involuntarily celibate…”

          So, men are entitled to sex?

          You know, one of the reasons why most women are suspicious of men is exactly for that reason. We assume a man is only out for what happens to be between our legs, and a man that doesn’t understand that we’re not interested in that is deemed a threat. A man that doesn’t understand no is deemed a threat. And there are a lot of men out there who don’t back off when they should. Because, god forbid, we ask you to care more about our individual body parts.

          We can’t always understand the difference between a sexual advance and a genuinely nice guy just making conversation. And we can’t always trust that the man making the advance will back off and be respectful if rejected. It’s uncomfortable to have someone violating your boundaries, but if you try to say directly “I’m not interested”, and the man swears at you, calls you a name, and acts as if you denied him something that is rightfully his, it turns scary. A man is bigger, stronger, and intimidating, especially when he doesn’t understand or respect “no”.

          • You know, one of the reasons why most women are suspicious of men is exactly for that reason. We assume a man is only out for what happens to be between our legs…

            This assumption that men alwways is out after sex is also a reason why 40% of rapist in 2010 were women. Source: NSIVS 2010 p.17-19 and p.24 – read for yourself, but here is the summary for the numbers behind my statement above.
            The last 12 months 1.1% of men and 1.1% of women were raped (penetrated or made to penetrate). 79.2% of those men reported a female perpetrator, almost 99% of the female victims reported a male perpetrator.

            • I don’t feel like arguing about the stats, let’s assume 40% of rapists are women raping men. So, men, get busy with education and prevention.

              -Offer self defense classes for men on college campuses; teach men how to protect themselves when a woma tries to rape them (since most men are physically stronger than women, this should not be difficult – but if it is, there is always pepper spray, car keys in the eye, etc.)

              – Educate men how to clearly communicate to women that they are not interested in having sex with them

              – Teach men to be cautious of strange women; don’t approach women or talk to them, because those women might think you want to have sex and they might attack you!

              – Educate women not to assume that men want sex; teach women not to come on to men or be sexually aggressive because that could be sexual assault

              These would all be ways to address the problem constructively, similar to what women have tried to do to adrdress the problem of sexual assault against women

            • Michael Rowe says:

              Flawless, Jill.

            • Michael,
              please just read the report and think for yourself and voice your own honest opinion as that would contribute more of value than just impulsive (based on the 3 minute difference in timestamps between Jill’s and yours comment) cheerleading.

            • Michael Rowe says:

              Tamen, with all due respect, if you really believe the two things are comparable, then Jill’s comments are spot on. If you don’t–and I don’t–then what she did by turning the rape prevention education paradigm around for men just shows how preposterous that specific comparison is. It’s not “impulsive cheerleading” by any stretch of the imagination. In fact, it’s not cheerleading at all. Whatever my own views on the concept of “rape culture” might be, your comparison is ridiculous. That’s me “thinking for myself.”

            • Michael, see that wasn’t so hard. Now you’ve actually contributed something to the discussion. I now know that you don’t think the two numbers are comparable. I do. Since you haven’t said whether you actually have read the report or not I am going to quote the definitions used for “rape” and “being made to penetrate someone else” in the NISVS 2010 report (page 17):

              “Rape” is defined as any completed or attempted unwanted vaginal (for women), oral, or anal
              penetration through the use of physical force (such as being pinned or held down, or by the
              use of violence) or threats to physically harm and includes times when the victim was drunk,
              high, drugged, or passed out and unable to consent. Rape is separated into three types,
              completed forced penetration, attempted forced penetration, and completed alcohol or drug
              facilitated penetration.

              “Being made to penetrate someone else” includes times when the victim was made to,
              or there was an attempt to make them, sexually penetrate someone without the victim’s
              consent because the victim was physically forced (such as being pinned or held down, or by
              the use of violence) or threatened with physical harm, or when the victim was drunk, high,
              drugged, or passed out and unable to consent.

              Can you tell me why you don’t think these two categories are comparable – or why the latter one is not rape in your view?

            • Michael Rowe says:

              You mean aside from the fact that a man has to be erect in order to penetrate a woman, whereas no rapist requires a woman to be sexually stimulated and “ready” in order for him to force his way inside her, and most men will not become erect enough to be “raped” by a woman under violent or threat-based circumstances? Or that fact that there is a dearth of reports of roving women, or gangs of women, trolling college campuses, parking lots, alleyways, or other dark places waiting to knock men to the ground and force those men to penetrate them? Or a dearth of wives who come home drunk, beat their husbands up, and force them to penetrate them?

              If you want to talk about domestic assault of men by women, that’s a whole different discussion. But when you start to equate the act of male rape of women to women forcing men to penetrate them (and I’m going to have to take your word for it that you can keep a straight face while equating those two things) you not only denigrate the experience of raped women, but you make it impossible to discuss any of the other cases where women might exploit or assault men (and yes, they happen) because you’ve made yourself the gender debate equivalent of a tinfoil hat-wearing conspiracy theorist that no one can take seriously because he thinks the government is controlling him with radio waves from his television set.

              Seriously, Tamen, it’s guys like you and drivel like this that makes it impossible to discu

            • Michael Rowe,
              Aha, so you are not saying that the are not comparable, you are saying that the latter doesn’t happen or at least happen very rarely. In short you are saying that there is something wrong with the statistics from CDC.

              And you base this on how you think erections works.

              First I don’t think you have fully thought through how erections works. Assuming from you name that you’re male: Have you ever had an erection when you were sleeping (physical impotence is diagnozed by registering erections or rather lack of them while at sleep)? Have you ever had an erection caused by physical stimuli without any sexual thoughts beforehand? In other words, have you ever had a boner you didnt’ want in a public setting where it was inappropriate? How successful were you in wishing that erection gone?

              Secondly I can point out that no erection is needed to penetrate someone orally. You may be tempted to argue that non-consentual oral sex is not rape – good luck with that.

              Thirdly as an anology I’ll just make you aware that it’s also not unheard of that female rape victims get lubricated and perhaps even experience an orgasm during rape. This in fact often makes the situation worse for the victims as they often feel betrayed by their own bodies and may increase any guilt they feel. I don’t reccoment trying to tell female rape victims that the body is not able to be sexually aroused in situations of terror and fright. Really, don’t! And don’t do so for male victims either. It’s the same mechanism – increased bloodflow and secretion of lubricants.

              I also gets the impression that you think that most if not all rape of women are violent stranger rape done by roving men or gangs of men trolling campuses, parking lots, alleyways and so on since you chose that as basis for a gender swap to “prove” that no women rapes men. It’s pretty accepted that most rape of women are acquaintance rape (75% by someone known to the victim, 38% a friend or acquaintance and 28% an intimate, 7% a relative – numbers from RAINN) and that it often occurs when the women is incapacitated by alcohol or drugs. Incapacitated to an extent as to not being able to give consent.

              It’s likely the same for men and the table on page 23 in the report reveals this distribution of perpetrators for men “being made to penetrate someone else”:
              Current or former intimate partner: 44.8%
              Acquaintance: 44.7%
              Strangers: 8.2%

              So can we leave the hypothetical roving gangs be?

              When I was 19 and still a virgin (I was not a ladies man and very shy and naive) I was at a party. There I met a girl and we did hit it off as we both got drunk. We made out at the disco during the evening at when the place closed a gang of us went back the student flats where the party started. We retreated into a bedroom and made out some more. We specifically agreed to not have sex (I was having this romantic notion of saving myself for true love and she revealed she was romantically involved with someone else who currently were out of town) and I fell asleep. Then I only remember waking up on my back with my trousers around my calves and she sitting on top of me with my erect penis inside her. I have no idea how long she had been at it and I just froze. After a while I made some thrusting movements and faked an orgasm to get it to end. This fucked me up for a long time and assertions like yours (erections means consent) and like the earlier comment saying that men always want sex (somehow I still felt I didn’t want it even if everone told me I as a man should) and the notion that men always can just physically overpower a woman played a part in that. And they probably played a big part of why she did it.

              Some years later the rape laws where I live were made gender neutral and a few years after that a woman were convicted and sent to jail for a couple of years for performing oral sex on a sleeping man at a party while her boyfriend cheered her on. I don’t recall if it were his stag-party, but he were engaged to be married a few months later and he reported the incident to the police. She first denied any sexual contact, but when DNA from her spit were recovered from swabs of his genital area she claimed that it was consensual (a familiar chain of claims seen in many male-on-female rape cases as well). The court didn’t believe her and she got sentenced. The defence attorney called for a reduction in sentencing because of the “massive” internation press coverage this story got.

              This is no tinfoil hat conspiracy theory. Although it does come from the government. It’s based on a study performed in 2010 by National Center for Injury Prevention and Control of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The 2008 study from the same centers are used as source by RAINN, the largest anti-sexual violence organization in the US. So it’s not something you need a tinfoil hat to receive over the radio waves – you can download it from the CDC homepage or Google it.

              See Jill. I am educating.

            • So the experience I had just over a decade ago and which left severe scarring around my scrotum is nothing more than drivel.

              Lisa Hickey…if you allow this comment from Michael Rowe to stand we will know exactly where male victims stand with GMP.

            • As hurtful as it is (and I am crying now) I believe it should stand as an example of the beliefs which needs to be dispelled. Beliefs which ahve denied the existence of male victims for a long time. They are out there and having them out in the open makes them so much easier to counter. It’s ignorance and ignorance does not have to be a permanent condition.

            • Michael Rowe says:

              I very clearly did not deny the existence of male victims, nor did I invalidate any of their experiences. I said that equating the physical act of male rape of women–with all the physical brutality and assault-force strength it takes to perform that rape–is not the same thing as a woman forcing a man to penetrate her as an act of “rape.” The comment was not a negation of male victims, it was a comment on the mechanics of rape. Manipulating it into something else is specious, and throws the credibility of all the other points you’ve made into question.

            • Michael Rowe,

              I’m not sure if your comment were a reply to me or to gwallan. I’ll answer it regardless.

              As I am sure too many women here can tell you: it does not take physical brutality and assault-force strength to perform a rape. Many women experience rape where no assault-strength force was used. Non-consent does not need to be physically expressed to be valid. Saying no and letting the rapist rape you without necessitating assault-strength force from the rapist side does not make it not a rape.

              Saying that rape takes physical brutality and assault-strenght to perform in fact denies the existense of many female rape victims who for instance were raped when unconscious, were threatened to accept being raped, were raped, but for some reasons froze and did not resist, where too drunk to physically resist, but were still conscious – in all these exmples the rapist didn’t need to use assault-strength force to perform the rape. Is it still not rape? I could go on and on.

              You say that mens rape of women takes physical brutality and assault-force strength to perform.

              You clearly do only know the only bare minimum about the mechanics of rape and that is troublesome.

            • Michael Rowe says:

              Tamen, I’m glad you were able to dry your tears and compose yourself long enough to continue to educate me, even if you find my alleged ignorance “troublesome.” The fact that you have the energy to continue to stubbornly refuse to understand my point gives me reason to hope that this conversation will continue, and dialogue and challenge is always good. Indeed, it is essential.

            • Ok, let’s get to the start.

              I asked what you though the difference between the two definitions used by the CDC were.
              You answered with some assertions that non-erect penises can’t be made to penetrate (what a bout orally?) and that most men won’t get erect when under violent or threatening circumstances and how you doubted there were gangs of roving women trolling college campuses, parking lots, alleyways, or other dark places waiting to knock men to the ground and force those men to penetrate them. Then you went on a tangent about domestic violence and me being a tinfoil hat wearing conspiracy theorist.

              I pointed out that non-erect penises can be made to penetrate women orally. And I pointed out that erections often do happen in inappropriate situations and that they often occur when physical stimuli is present and that they can’t be controlled consciously. I also pointed out that vast majority of men reporting being made to penetrate someone reported an intimate partner or an acqaintance as the perpetrator. Only 8% said stranger. So the lack of roving gangs of women “theory” doesn’t prove anything.
              I told how a woman made me penetrate her and about a woman sentenced to jail for rape because she made a man penetrate her orally.
              I re-iterated the source for the statistics I’ve quoted.

              You then said that equating the physical act of male rape of women–with all the physical brutality and assault-force strength it takes to perform that rape–is not the same thing as a woman forcing a man to penetrate her as an act of “rape.”

              I questioned whether this definition requiring physical brutality and assault-force strength didn’t exclude non-violent coercions of women to have penetrative sex.

              You didn’t answer. I’d still like to hear your answer. What do you call it when a man make a woman against her will without physical brutality and assault-force strength into having sex with him?

            • I’ll just put this here.

              http://www.genderratic.com/?p=443

              “The fact that you have the energy to continue to stubbornly refuse to understand my point”

              Your point is that you are conjecturing, without any personal knowledge, on how rape victims experience their rape.

              Female on male rape can be violent and brutal and leave lasting physical injuries.

              Imagine a 20 lb medicine ball being thrown at your crotch, Michael. Now consider the kind of force the average, 150lb woman can bring to bear whilst mounted on a man. The penis and testicles are the most vulnerable part of your body; hit them hard enough and you can die.

              Many people also conjecture on how more or less difficult it is for a man to rape a woman versus a woman raping a man. I have many years experience with wrestling. Woman on top(top mount) is one of the most physically dominant positions. In it even someone smaller can exert physical control over someone larger, if the larger person is untrained.

            • I remember reading about a woman in the UK who ripped a mans testicles out of his scrotum with her bare hands. I don’t think women understand that the penis gets hard from blood entering it.

              In point of fact, men are very vulnerable to injury during erection (whether an inexperienced women is on top, or he falls in the dark or whatever).

              Sometimes I think people hear “women attacking men” and go pffftttt yeah right.

            • It’s very simple. Force has nothing to do with rape. Coercion can take many forms other than the physical. The manipulation which is occurring here is yours alone.

              “The comment was not a negation of male victims, it was a comment on the mechanics of rape.”

              And I came down in last night’s shower. Your comment on what you call the “mechanics of rape” is negation in the purest sense possible.

              When I was seven and my aunt was riding me like there was no tomorrow I had an erection. I must have wanted it.

            • Lisa Hickey says:

              Gwallan, no where do I see anyone invalidating your personal experience. I think it’s important that those stories be told. I am extremely supportive of anyone who wants to do that so that others can learn, understand, and empathize.

              Tamen gave a very long, detailed reply to Michael Rowe, and I am letting both stand. We do challenge others on this site in order to better understand.

              I do hope you consider submitting your story, or that of someone you know — email me at lisa at goodmenproject dot com. thanks.

            • @Ms Hickey…

              “no where do I see anyone invalidating your personal experience”

              What the hell do you call the use of language such as “drivel”? Give me a break.

              There is no way on earth I will allow scrutiny of my life to the likes of Schwyzer or Rowe.

            • I will add that given what you have allowed to stand from Rowe through this thread I would not allow you such scrutiny either.

            • elementary_watson says:

              While I think it is informative to let Rowe’s first comment stand (because the point it tried to make was so exquisitely rebutted by Tamen), the later comments by Rowe could be taken down, as they completely ignore the valid points Tamen made – Rowe just stands by his “men’s rape of women is horribly brutal, women’s rape of men is no big deal” point of view, ignoring most female rape victims and belittling the pain of male rape victims, adding nothing to the debate but hurt for those already suffering.

            • Is this rape apologizing? You need to educate yourself on the mechanics and psychological impacts of errection and rape. Being forced to penetrate means also being forced to be arroused to some extent, already there is the pressure of having to perform at something you don’t want. It’s akin to forcing a woman to become arroused and raping them if anything. The day a male can control an erection is the day after we crack time travel.

              Men can and do get erections during sleep, unconsciousness (alcohol for example), fear, etc. Now not all of these attempts will probably succeed, but the rape stats for women include failed attempts as well. So yes, they are comparable. Both suffer horribly from it, and it’s stupid to try assume one suffers more, BAD IS BAD. Women have the risk of pregnacy and major damage to the point of harming their ability to reproduce, men have the risk of being liable for pregnancy (male rape victims have been made to pay child support), and damage to their ability to reproduce. Both get the STD risks, psychological trauma, etc.

              You assume most men will not be physically ready, and congratulations on a nice big victim blaming statement. You’ve implied men need to be turned on to be raped, however being physically aroused and psychologically arroused and wanting it are verrrry different. You wouldn’t argue that women who orgasm from their rape must have wanted it too right? Men get erections whilst undergoing medical exams, something very UNSEXY and nerve racking. Seriously, think about it and please don’t go spreading misinformation because male rape is already disbelieved at a high level.

              And of course, ALL rape/abuse is bad, regardless of gender.

            • So what you’re saying Jill is that only men can stop rape and that is true regardless of whether it’s women raping men or it’s men raping women? Are you saying that men have the responsibility to educate women about ethical sexual behaviour? Are you saying that borderline victim-blaming like “victims needed to be better at saying no” or “victims shouldn’t have approached or talked to their rapist” are ok? Are you for real?
              Are you saying that the reality indicated by this statistics causes no other response in you than a need to say something which sounds pretty close to “Probably not true, but even if it were so it doesn’t concern women.”

              There already are a number of rape prevention programs run by organizations which at leasts on the surface purport to be gender neutral (for instance RAINN) and yes, those certainly need to implement some variant of a few of your suggestions – actually only one of them would’ve prevented my rape (Educate women not to assume that men want sex).

              You apparently suggesting in full seriousness that men should teach women not to come on to men or be sexually agressive because that could be sexual assault makes me suspect you’re a troll.
              There obviously is nothing wrong with women being sexually aggressive or coming on to men as long as they can see and understand the difference between consent and non-consent.

              I have been busy, very busy the last few days informing (or educating if you want) people about these statistics on the platforms available to me where I can reach the most people who at least by their own admission actually care about gender issues. I don’t care if you want to argue about the stats or not, but please do read the report.

            • Tamen, all of my suggestions are things taught to women in rape prevention classes. I recall a class like that held at my dorm in college. We were told that, yes, it is our responsibility as women to learn how to say no clearly. We were told that is our responsibility to learn to protect ourselves (in fact, learning self defense is empowering). The men in the class were told things like “no means no,” we discussed how the fact that a woman is being friendly and even flirting doesn’t necessarily mean she wants sex, and they were told that being sexually aggressive could be sexual assault. we talked about how hitting on someone can be sexual harassment.

              If we want to stop women from rapig men, then yes, that is the kind of education that is needed.

              I am not denying that there are situations where women sexually assault men and that is something that should not happen. So how do you stop it? Education and prevention. If men don’t think existing organizations are dealing with the problem then found your own organizations to provide the education that is needed, which is what women did when they decided that existing structures (campus administration, police etc.) were ignoring the problem.

            • Jill,

              Did they also teach men “not to come on to women or be sexually aggressive because that could be sexual assault”? Did they also teach women “don’t approach men or talk to them”?

              You said: “If we want to stop women from rapig men, then yes, that is the kind of education that is needed. ”
              Yet you don’t seem to be considering that women have any responsibility in changing rape prevention education or by their own violition educate themselves to reduce the risk of becoming a rapist. No, men need to do this. Am I to draw the logical conclusion from this? Did you pose that sentence as a question for a reason? Is this an IF for you?

              I am being antagonistic here, but considering that your response to a comment educating that the belief that men always want sex increases the risk for women raping a man and just how likely it currently is for a man in the US to be raped by a woman, was a snarky response saying let’s assume and that men should get busy with education and prevention and tops it with throwing in some really stupid rape prevention advice (the two examples I refers to first in this comment). A response which sounded very much like: “We don’t need to adjust, you are responsible for making us behave ethically”.

              It’s pretty clear that education and prevention needs to change to reflect this, resisting such change will reflect poorly on those who do so. And, frankly, you came across as resisting such change by excluding yourself from it.

            • Tamen, I do not intend to denigrate your personal experience in any way. What happened to you was very wrong.

              However, my point is, if women are out there raping men in large numbers (as you argue) and causing men lasting physical and emotional damage, then where is the rape prevention training to teach men about these hordes of dangerous female sexual predators? Men, particularly young men, need to be warned that they could be victimized. Women are taught self defense. They are taught interpersonal strategies to reduce risk of date rape. (In the class I took, we practiced yelling “no” as loud as we could.). This is not victim blaming, this is simple self preservation. At the same time, maybe women need to be taught that men aren’t always interested in having sex, and that they should not always assume that the men they meet want sex.

              I am sure that the thousands of men who frequent bars and nightclubs every weekend are unaware that 40% of rapists are women and that they need to be cautious because any woman they meet could try to forcibly rape them. So it sounds like the word needs to get out if it is the widespread problem that you describe. Men could actually learn a lot from female-led rape prevention efforts. Talk about the problem, reduce stigma, empower, teach. If 40% of rapists are women — that’s an extraordinary number and clearly something should be done.

            • There are already gender-neutral rape awareness campaigns, why aren’t they getting the word out of male victimization and female perpetration? Quite frankly any advocator against rape should be pushing for change, even those who advocate against rape culture should be helping to end rape of males as well as females when there are studies suggesting quite a few male rapists of women were raped by women. It’s clear there is a cycle of abuse that can go on so ending violence against all people is the number 1 priority to ending violence against women, if the abusive male that harmed his wife WASN’T harmed in the first place the chances of him abusing would probably be much lower.

              Yet of all the activists in rape and abuse campaigns I have heard of, I can’t recall any of them identifying that link. Why?

            • “Yet of all the activists in rape and abuse campaigns I have heard of, I can’t recall any of them identifying that link. Why?”

              Exactly if people were really interested in putting a halt to rape then the only way to stop is to get at the cause of it. No “Take back the Night” Campaign or “guys talk with your friends and family and tell them not to rape” line is going to do it. We should be using our scientific endeavors more to discover what causes people to do the atrocious things they do. I’ll bet if we did more research we would find that there are multiple facets to what causes a person to ultimately rape the people that they do.

            • Jill: “then where is the rape prevention training to teach men about these hordes of dangerous female sexual predators?”

              Do you talk about the hordes of dangerous male sexual predators out there? Why that sensationalist choice of word? Is it a tactic to exaggerate to make the NISVS 2010 finding seem more ludicrous and thus less believable? I have to wonder. In any way it does make you sound insincere.

              Prior to the CDC report the vast majority of feminists, rape prevention activists and society at large didn’t believe that there might be a parity in rape prevalence now. Ideas that an erection must signify consent are very common among both genders. Just like the idea that women wearing skimp outfits are partly to blame if they’re raped is close to equally distributed across the genders. The CDC report were published on thursday or friday I believe. Isn’t it a bit premature after 5 days to point to the lack of rape prevention programs adequately adressing it’s finding as an argument against the CDC findings?

              Some studies done with college students as respondents indicated the CDC result, but they were dismissed by most feminists, rape prevention activists, DV activists and by most people in society. This study is harder to dismiss and we’ll see to what extent the CDC study is able to change a belief people have held for a very long time.

              I’d wager that very many of the men who have been made to penetrate someone else thinks that they’re pretty much alone in having that experience – after all that is what society have preached for many decades: “Women are the overwhelmingly majority of rape victims and men are the overwhelmingly majority of rapists”. People who think they’re anomolies tend to hide that – perhaps even to themselves.

              Perhaps I am breading you too subtextual, but some more things in you comment stand out. You say that maybe women should learn that they shouldn’t assume that men always want sex. Maybe. Women who believe that men always want sex are not that different from a man who believes that if a woman have had sex with 10 other guys she must want to have sex with him. How would you feel about a rape prevention program which stated that women should learn self defence and say no clearly while saying that maybe men need to be taught that no means no?

              And then you say that perhaps men must be more wary of any women they meet at bars because they might try to rape them forcibly. Invoking a kind of Schrødinger rapist approach for men. You should read Lisa’s article on how living in fear is not helpful. Why do I again get the impression that you picked this as an exaggeration to ridicule the findings? The CDC reported also that 44% of perpetrators who made a man penetrate them without his consent were an intimate partner of the victim. Another 44% were an acquintance, 8% were a stranger. A pattern which we recognize from statistics about male rapists and their female victims.

            • Tamen, I fail to u derstand your objection to teaching rape prevention classes for men if, indeed, your claim that 40% of rapists are when and that men are just as likely as women to be raped.

              We can quibble about the content of whatever education is needed but if your stats are accurate then clearly it’s a major social problem that needs to be addressed. And I would argue that if the stats are true, men do need to be more cautious about the women they meet because what you are telling me is that there are a lot of women out there who could be rapists (just as most women are cautious about men because there are a lot of men out there who could be rapists).

              If this isn’t what you are advocating, then what you are advocating be done about the high risk of women raping men that you are identifying? Shouldn’t men be educated that they are potentially in danger from these predatory women? Shouldn’t we be trying to educate women to change their behavior?

            • Yes, Jill. Rape prevention programs are important in combatting rape. In fact in my comment on 18th at 8:26pm which were addressed at you I said: “It’s pretty clear that education and prevention needs to change to reflect this”. I do however object to your framing of the rape prevention classes with a misaligned focus on the content (primarily around preventing stranger rape, which is not the primary rape risk for men) and the use of words as maybe as qualifier for what repsonsibilities women have to educate themselves on this.

            • Agreed. They are just as important as false accusation prevention programs for women.

            • Sterling posts Tamen and Archy

            • Tamen, thanks for the references to the NISVS study (for those reading this comment thread who have found it hard to find based on the info given, it’s here: http://www.cdc.gov/ViolencePrevention/pdf/NISVS_Report2010-a.pdf)

              I’m really interested by the figures. As you rightly say, it shows that the numbers of men and of women reporting forced penetration or rape respectively are very similar in the last 12 months at about 1.27 million for both genders (I’m not in any way suggesting ‘forced penetration’ is not rape – just using the terminology of the report as accurately as I can). However the reported figures for lifetime experiences of rape and forced penetration for women and men are very different indeed – 18.3% of women reported being raped during their lifetime whereas 4.8% of men reported being forced to penetrate.

              This really makes me wonder what’s going on – is it that there is suddenly a massive increase in the incidence of men being forced to penetrate? There isn’t any discussion of this in the report that I can see. Do you know if there has been anywhere else?

            • Hi Julia,
              Memory is a fickle and unreliable thing and even more so over time. Finkelhor (1) notes that “it is well-established in survey research that the validity of reports declines with the distance from the event.” Memory is basically a reconstructive process, and what is recalled depends upon our current beliefs and feelings (2-4). We literally “make up stories” about our lives and reality (2) and may even come to believe in memories of events that never happened (4).

              1. Finkelhor D: A Sourcebook on Child Sexual Abuse (Hardcover)(Paperback). Beverly Hills, Sage, 1986 [Back]

              2. Dawes RM: Rational Choice in an Uncertain World (Paperback). New York, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1988 [Back]

              3. Loftus EF, Korf NL, Schooler JW: Misguided memories: sincere distortion of reality, in Credibility Assessment (Hardcover). Edited by Yuille JC. Boston, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1989 [Back]

              4. Loftus E, Ketcham K: Witness for the Defense (Hardcover)(Paperback). New York, St. Martin’s Press, 1991 [Back]

              Also worth noting is:

              Dr. Malcolm George of the St Bartholomew’s and Royal London Hospital Medical School, author of Aggression in British Heterosexual Relationships, suggests:

              [T]he British Home Office study published 1999) showed that men do not report assaults that happened long ago. The break down of life time victims by how long ago was the last assault showed that women were far more likely to report that the last assault they experienced was more than ten years ago.

              Now, consider how female sexual abuse of men were viewed in the past – like 40 to 10 years ago. Try to ask your father about the concept of being forced to penetrate someone else. It simply did not exist and I suspect many of the respondents (note that 49% were over 45 year old) framed their experiences very differently. I have friends who have related pretty much the same history as mine; they woke up to a woman performing some sexual act on them. They framed it as they got lucky – she couldn’t resist them and so on. None of them would describe it as being made to penetrate someone else – except that’s what technically happened. They claimed to be happy about the outcome, but then again being unhappy were only a acceptable outcome if the woman was sufficiently unattractive. Anyway, that doesn’t make what the women did any less wrong. You can’t go on having sex with people without consent on the chance that they’ll be OK with it – even if the odds of them saying they’re OK with it is quite high.

              When men only have a very limited range where they are allowed to say no to sex (because they are expected to always want sex and are taught to believe that they always want sex) it’s no wonder that many then think they wanted it – and hence they don’t recognize it as being unconsentual.

              Women are made much more aware of the possibillities of rape against them in many forms, it being assault rape by stranger, spousal rape (what is your first thought when you here spousal rape? The expression is gender neutral, but I bet the vast majority of people will think of male rapist an female victim upon hearing that term) and so on. There are a lot of PSAs, prevention programs, movies and so on which deals with this and although they nowadays tend to be couched in gender neutral language the belief that rape primarily happens to women and that rapists just about always are men shines through very clearly and the gender neutral language for me often ends up looking like a thin facade of political correctness tacked on to avoid unpleasant accusations of discrimination. That may just be my cynicism built up by the reaction I got to telling my story IRL and online.

              Some decades ago there were an arena where women had very little room to say no to sex. Namely whithin the marriage. Hence the cliche’s of “not tonight, I have a headache” and so on. Many women at that time framed it as doing their maritial duty, lying on their back and thinking of the regent and the homecountry. Because that’s what society (including their mothers and female friends) told them. It took some effort, time and campaigning to build a real critical mass recognition of spousal rape for what it was. And it will take some effort, time and campaigning to build a recognition that men can be raped too (and that they can be raped by women) – not just among women, but also among men themselves.

              A final thought: A man who was sexually assaulted in some ways by a woman and who experience that society tells him that it’s no big deal, that it didn’t happen, that he did want it since he “performed” and so on untill he himself believes it to be no big deal, nothing wrong, do you think he would have more or less empathy towards female rape victims later on? We can’t just look at this isolated. It’s a human issue and the long-time framing of rape as a almost exclusively female issue I believe has done harm on several levels.

            • PursuitAce says:

              Jill, I’m glad you brought that up. Women or men flirting with strangers is a form of sexual harassment. Knock it off everyone.

            • Jill

              All that carry on and hysteria in campus less about rape and more about fear mongering, rabble rousing and politicization designed by the radical hate mongers higher up in the feminist movement, the naive young feminists that they draw in don’t realize that.

              Were they serious about ending abuse as opposed to spreading separatist hate propaganda and politicizing, they wouldn’t always being lying about rape and abuse being gendered.

      • Jun Kafiotties says:

        CDC study shows 1 in 7 men suffered severe physical violence from their intimate partner, 1 in 2 suffered psychological violence, 1 in 4 suffering any form of physical violence. Males also more likely to suffer violence overall, W.H.O stats showing males suffer 2.6x more violence than females, and majority of stranger violence (apart from rape of course) is male-male.

        I’d say men should be the ones in fear but where does that get us? Prejudice is bad, I could assume all these men and women are out to get me but does it really help? Being cautious is fine but living a life in fear can stop you actually LIVING life. Sure we need to do something about abuse and violence, but it needs to be inclusive of all victims and perps and not simply omg men are attacking women and you guys get it soo easyyy walking the streets, so easy being in more danger…The only benefit men have is ignorance to the reality, and that we generally haven’t been trained from birth to live lives in fear. It’s sad but we train women to be so fearful of men to the point it probably causes more problems than solves.

        Society won’t change until everyone gets the help n support they need, abuser or abused, regardless of gender or race.

        • Did you notice in the CDC figures as well that when the violence is against women they’re much, much more likely to suffer more severe injuries and longer lasting psychological effects? You may also want to pull out the line that domestic homicides are roughly equal between women and men. However, those figures also don’t take into account when those incidents are in self-defense or the result of years of psychological and physical abuse. You know what else is not accounted for? The fact that women still make less than men and are therefore more likely to be financially dependent on their male parters in a heterosexual relationship making it much more difficult to leave abusive situations than it is for men. Men also don’t have to worry about being a whore for having too many relationships or being accused of not doing enough to “keep the family together,” like women are.

          So yes, Jun, men are abused by women in relationships. This is not even disputable. You are absolutely correct to say that. However, where you are wrong is in assuming that there is some sort of equivalence in the effects of abuse.

          • You are right, men are more likely to be killed by their partner. Definitely not equivalent…
            It should probably not go unsaid that because there is probably more physical/sexual violence perpetrated against women, the violence done to men is of no consequence (or perhaps deserved…)

          • MorgainePendragon says:

            Rubbish.

            3.4 women PER DAY in the US are murdered by men who claim to love them.

            In the UK it’s 2-3 per week, similar in Australia and New Zealand.

            PLEASE provide official stats on the number of men in the US PER DAY murdered by women with whom they are intimate.

        • MorgainePendragon says:

          Since I provided a link to my source, it’s only common courtesy that you provide a link to yours.

        • Jun Kafiotties says:

          “However, those figures also don’t take into account when those incidents are in self-defense or the result of years of psychological and physical abuse.”
          So it’s quite possible that much of the male > female abuse is after suffering many years of psychological and physical abuse too?
          Males in our society tend to be conditioned to weather physical abuse and are made to toughen up, don’t show weakness, and considering how many abusers have BEEN abused before it makes logical sense that males suffer quite badly from abuse. Add to the fact that we’ve had many years of support and awareness of violence against women mixed with a major macho culture of men not being able to show weakness would also skew the results. I highly doubt we can actually gauge the damage between the genders, or compare it really, women are seen as weaker and trained to be fearful which might put more fear in them whilst men are trained to not show weakness. It’s also a fact many men delay going to doctors and to admit being beaten up by a woman is a major no no in such culture.

          I can’t see if they mention depression, suicide attempts between the genders as a result of victimization, drug abuse/usage, increased violence after. What I do see is a bit on PTSD, trouble sleeping and just a FEW of the many health effects includes and yes it suggests women suffer worse from those.

          “Men also don’t have to worry about being a whore for having too many relationships or being accused of not doing enough to “keep the family together,” like women are.”
          Men worry about supporting the family financially, the majority of financial burden in relationships is still on men to be the breadwinner (gender roles, women as child carers first and foremost whilst man is at work, then both on weekends look after the kid), a non breadwinner can nag and nag and actually add to self esteem issues, stress, etc of the breadwinner which is psychological abuse. You underestimate the level of shame men feel on their families, so many felt like a failure during the GFC because they couldn’t provide.

          Men and women are raised quite differently, comparing their experience is far more complex than pure stats alone. If women are more likely to speak up on their abuse then of course we will always assume they suffer more if the men aren’t also speaking up enough but atm both men and women have complex reasons why many are not speaking up, so it’s hard to compare. What we do know is that both genders are suffering from abuse, both have severe impacts from that abuse, males tend to be disproportionally the victim of stranger abuse and females with known offender abuse, but both are still 100% worthy of awareness and support. ATM there is a massive lack of support services available to men or awareness of their issues, combined with a culture of men not showing weakness all it is doing is making many suffer in silence and SOME of them go on to abuse in the vicious cycle.

          Why I mentioned the men wasn’t for a pissing contest, it was to prove males deserve our love n support as much as females, that we shouldn’t continue portraying women as bigger victims of ALL violence, not just rape or dv, nor should we for the men but simply Everyone is suffering and everyone needs our help. It’s very easy to spot the physical damage causes by abuse, seeing as men have more strength on average it will probably show them doing more PHYSICAL damage but it doesn’t show the mental damage that goes on and those stats didn’t show it either from what I saw (i may be wrong, but as I said much is left out). When we have males 4x more likely to commit suicide than women, we need to find out why are they killing themselves? When we have males fighting much more than women do physically, we need to ask WHY are they fighting?

          We already have so much for women and I think that is great but we need to include men because violence isn’t always non-reciprocal. If a woman slaps n punches (women are capable of doing major damage regardless of what you think, especially with weapons involved), and a man fights back but she gets hurt more? Who is to blame? The man who defended himself? Of course it could be her acting to years of abuse but abuse can be a 2 way street very often, she could have given him the world of abuse, he drank the pain away and ends up bashing her one day in drunken rage after years of torment but what do we see on the outside? Woman beaten badly by abusive drunk.

          These posts always devolve into who gets hurt more and people fight over who gets it worse, women play victim and bring out the 1,2,3,4 women get killed per week from their husbands, Yeah? And most murder victims are men, abuse and crime are heavily linked so how many of those murderers were abused with NO ACCESS TO HELP? Think of the BIGGER PICTURE THAN RELATIONSHIPS ONLY. People bring in baggage from childhood, other relationships, work stress, culture, economic status, peace/war, etc.

          So people Please drop the prejudice against each gender, that 6’6 man on the street could beat the %$%^ out of you, or he could also be the knight in shining armor syndrome man who will die fighting to protect you. The woman might beat you, stab you, file false rape (male fear), or she might step in and protect you from all of the above. Also stop assuming physical strength is the end all be all of violence, I was much bigger than my bullies and could easily have hospitalized them but I rarely fought back, there are plenty of men in relationships who are VERY strong who were raised to never hit a woman regardless and will take a beating from a woman. I’ve seen it plenty of times in my school life and adulthood, females hitting men with very little if EVER repercussions, these females would pinch, punch, slap, scratch, kick guys in the nuts and the guys didn’t fight back but if a man had done it there’d be a fight. Finally I’ll say the physical violence I went through was the easy part, the hard part to deal with was the psychological abuse, and there is no male=moremuscle benefit there.

        • Are you all assuming that the “intimate partner” abusing men is a woman?

      • The research that produced by independent, professional researchers with no agenda (not feminist propagandists that abuse stats.) find dv to at least half commit by women, in 100s of studies that replicate each other, this pattern is only ever broken when feminists are presenting the stats.

        • I happen to know for a fact that these studies use the CTS/CTS2 scales. The CTS scale did not account for injuries, while the CTS2 only marginally does. Neither of these scales or the studies that use them account for the context of when the violence occurs. I’ll give you an example.

          A man comes home drunk, he gets grabby and pushy with his wife, whom he has abused in the past and is psychologically demeaning to. If she shoves him back, there has been equal violence. They’ve both committed an act of minor violence against each other. He slaps her and she grabs a knife and stabs him to defend herself. Now, she has committed a much greater level of violence against him, according to those studies. However, not by any stretch of the imagination could you weave that situation as the husband being the one that is abused.

          And that, my friend, is how those studies completely miss the point. They’re relying on statistics created by indices that have no way of capturing the context in which domestic disputes occur.

          • Peter Houlihan says:

            In that case I’d say both of them are being abused: The wife doesn’t deserve to be treated like that, but it doesn’t give her the right to stab him. Its a complex situation, in that respect I’d agree that the studies are simplistic.

          • You know.

            That’s just the bullshit about the cts that feminist academics spread about cts. Then they will cite studies that use a cts, that have been tampered with.

            They are con artists dressed up as academics.

            • Exactly, Ron.

              The famous researchers Strauss and Gelles (who found 1 woman is abused every 14.5 seconds) are banned from giving testimony at VAWA reauthorization hearings.

              Why? Because the newer studies (which takes into account the combat tactics scales and which defensive combat and everything else) shows gender symmetry.

              Erin Prizzey who opened the first battered women’s shelter also wanted to open a shelter for men. She stated that she found women abused in equal numbers to men.

              She was tormented and threatened (with bomb threats and other things) by radical feminists who took over the shelter movement and kicked Erin out of her own movement.

              ht tp://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/when-feminists-attack/

              While waiting outside (since he couldn’t give testimony before congress at VAWA reauthorization hearing) Daddy Justice waited outside the meeting room to explain to Dr. Phil McGraw that he gave false testimony when he Dr. Phil stated DV was overwhelmingly a male perpetrated problem.

              He was attacked by a gender-zealot executive of a DV organisation.

              These people very much fear the truth. They do not care for peer reviewed evidence based studies. They instead cling for dear life to their advocacy research.

              We are annoying these people so badly that they have to resort to ACTS OF VIOLENCE to shut up men and women who know the harm laws created from feminist lies can do.

              ht tp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qodygTkTUYM

              Here feminists disrupt a forum on battered husbands. We are dealing with outright ZEALOTRY.

            • A couple of years ago there was also a push in the UK to adopt standards of behavior between strangers as the standard of what constitutes rape between married couples.

              In other words, if your wife turned you down for sex and you began whispering pillow talk and fondling her to get her to come around, then you could be charged with a sex crime.

              Luckily, I do not believe this movement took hold.

              It’s pretty clear that feminists hate the male libido.

          • Jun Kafiotties says:

            That variance you talk about in CTS can also mean she could initiate the fight and both can be hurt badly. Fights also escalate extremely quick, even a light slap can knock someone out, their unconcious body can fall down stairs or hit a corner of a table and cause a serious injury or death. A single punch can kill, it’s happened in Australia and I know of women who can knock men out in 1 hit. This focus on men doing more damage is silly and quite annoying, women are easily capable of doing a lot of serious damage physically and mentally just as men are.

            If you really want to talk about bad stats, how about the fact the DOJ refused to fund studies into male victims of DV, or the bias and highly gendered focus of many DV stats. The CDC is probably the first apart from the CTS studies that takes this into account, although the same size of the cts studies is over 300k and this one was 15-20k I believe. They also didn’t count forcing someone to penetrate/envelopment as rape, but “other” sexual assault which gives them a smaller number to say for men, which could be used to minimize peoples perceptions of male victims of rape. 1 in 71 male “rape” victims as opposed to 1 in 21 male victims of envelopment ALONE. All forms of sexual assault being “nearly” 1 in 2 for women and 1 in 5 for men. Problem with stats though is they’re regularly used as a way for people to minimize another’s experience. Some men and women seem to commonly do this as a way to act like women suffer worse from violence and abuse as if there is a prize at stake. I try to use them to illustrate simply that both suffer, and both need help. Gendered campaigns of awareness though require both genders each to have one and both be similarly focused on so we don’t have a massive gap in male victim awareness for example that currently exists. Equality isn’t about picking which problem is bigger, otherwise why care about rights of minorities when feminism was the bigger concern than black rights since there are more females than blacks? Equality is about including everyone, ensuring everyone gets a fair chance and currently males might have a lot in power but they are also disproportionately the ones who are homeless, in prisons, and victims of violence as a total. Making thousands of women’s shelters with very little awareness for men as victims or support isn’t equality, even if women are 80% of DV victims, there is STILL a significant amount of men who need help.

            Atm males are constantly hearing that their abuse is worthless because women get it worse, “ohhh but men do the most violenceee!” Yeah? They suffer it the most too as a whole (all of society). “Women are weaker physically, receive more injuries cuz men are stronger?” Yeah? Does that mean the men who are abused deserve less attention or support? Where exactly does an abused man go with his kids, he’ll see women’s shelter and WOMEN ONLY in those shelters as a rule quite a lot but how does he get the kids safe from an abusive woman? I know many shelters will probably try help but only after digging deep, the language is so gendered that most men probably have no idea where to go. This is why I am so angry, because anti-violence isn’t about the victims, it’s about the biggest victim only and who cares about the other. Stats are weapons used to portray women as victims, men as perps and if you say any different they will be pulled out again to say BUTWOMENGETITWORSEEEE to the point it denies men as victims. I’ve seen MRA’s do this too, it’s annoying and angers me because it isn’t better. I can show you stats where women get it easier if you just count violence as a total, 2.6x more men as victims W.H.O stats seemed to suggest but even then violence against women or men is deadly serious and both need to stop. Doesn’t matter to the victim that women get it more, or men get it more, they still suffer regardless and if we don’t accept female perps as mainstream then they won’t be given the support they need to stop their abusive ways like we EXPECT men to.

          • Just trying to get to grips with what constitutes abuse for either gender. At this point a slapped woman is a victim but a man with a knife stuck in him is not.

            This might explain why so many women have told me I was privileged or lucky to be raped by my aunt.

            I have the perfect XMAS present for you.

      • natureartist says:

        I had mentioned that statistic of one in four women sexually assaulted a few years ago when talking with some friends, a number of them male. One of the men was my husband, and all of the men collectively just wrote off that statistic as greatly exaggerated. Their reasoning was that they just didn’t believe that out of all the women they met throughout their lives, one out of every four could have been assaulted. I then asked, how do you know? Do you expect women to introduce themselves to you followed up with their sexual assault history? It was that evening that my husband found out that his own wife was saved from a sexual assault when I was 16 years old. One of the other women in the group revealed that she had been a victim of sexual assault. There were only three women in the room. He never denied the reality of 1 in 4 again.

        However, I do think good men get a bad rap. But what do we do about it? Self preservation is instinctive. To expect women to ignore their instincts for survival is kind of unrealistic. I am not sure there is a solution.

      • If you read that CDC study carefully you will note that “forced into penetrating someone else” is not included in the rape category. They are saying that if a woman straddles an unconscious man and put his penis inside them then it’s not classified as rape neither is it if she starts to perform a blowjob on him. I disagree and the law where I live disagree.

        If we move “forced to penetrate someone else” into the rape category in that survey (see tables on page 18 and 19 on the actual survey) then we get this result on how many have been raped in the last 12 months:
        Women: 1.1% (estimated to 1,270,000)
        Men: 1.1% (estimated to 1,267,000)

        I’ll try to put a direct link to the survey in my next comment to avoid this being moderated.

        • Here is the link to the CDC report itself: http://www.cdc.gov/ViolencePrevention/pdf/NISVS_Report2010-a.pdf

          Look at tables on page 18 and 19. See page 17 on how they define “Being made to penetrate someone else”: victim was made to, or there was an attempt to make them,sexually penetrate someone without the victim’s consent because the victim was physically forced (such as being pinned or held down, or by the use of violence) or threatened with physical harm, or when the victim was drunk, high, drugged, or passed out and unable to consent.

          Note that the 1.1% for rape of women also included completed or attempted rape so in that the two definition are equals, both count attempted.

          • Good catch Tamen.
            I’m assuming the 1 in 4 raped/assaulted number for women is over a lifetime.

            This would mean that over a man’s lifetime he also has a 1 in 4 chance of having been raped by a woman.

            • Hi John D.

              Not according to the CDC study which found a lifetime prevalence number of 4,8% for male victims. Now, the difference between the last 12 months and lifetime prevalence is only 3.7 for men while it is in contrast 17.1 for women. Are lifetime prevalences underreported? Are we seeing a very sharp increase in male rape victimization?

              But it does mean that a man is just as likely as a women to be raped today and it means that 40% of rapist in 2010 were women (p 24 of the report states that 79.2% of those 1,1% men who reported rape reported that the perpetrator were female.)

          • natureartist says:

            Sexual assault is not necessarily rape. Naturally the statistics for assault are higher than they would be for rape, since it is more inclusive. However, I just recently heard a news account that the definition of rape may be changed to include other forms of assault. Has anyone else heard that?

            I think men who are the victims of assault from women are much less likely to come forward with that information. Women are becoming more sexually assertive, and some of them may go over the top as well with men. The assumption is that all men want it. Men can find themselves in a difficult place. I wonder if the statistic of men being assaulted is underrepresented. For that matter, do they even accept overly aggressive sexual behavior from a female as an assault?

            • http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2011-12-15/news/bs-md-rape-definition-20111215_1_definition-crimes-police-statistics

              The FBI has recently taken steps to change its definition of rape (which was extrmely problematic and antiquated). Basically their old definition limited “rape” to mean only ‘vaginal rape with a penis by a violent stranger after the woman had fought back vigorously.’ Other jurisdictions have long used different definitions and the disparity of definitions has been one of the biggest problems when discussing rape or when discussing rape statistics.

              That definition has also been problematic in skewing stats on “false” reports of rape because since the definition is open to interpretation law enforcement can decide that what a victim reports as rape is not “rape.” For example a jurisdiction can decided that a man who was anally raped was not “raped” because the penetration was anal rather than vaginal so his accusation would be changed to “assault” and his report of rape would be chalked up as a “false” report. Or a jurisdiction can decide that a girl who was slipped rohypnal was not “raped” because she passed out and did not fight back vigorously so they reclassify it as “assault” and chalk it up as a “false” report.

              It is really important that we all understand the terminology when discussing such important topics. Getting the FBI definition changed is a step in the right direction.

    • Peter Houlihan says:

      I don’t think thats fair, I’m sure he writes it because he believes it. Doesn’t make it right, but its his pen.

  2. Only within feminism could all men be assumed to be rapists.

    That is one of many reasons the vast majority of women reject it, seeing the direct connection between feminism and hatred and demonization of males.

    • MorgainePendragon says:

      “Only within feminism could all men be assumed to be rapists.”

      Please cut and paste where this article (or ANY writing from a reputable source) says this.

      And plenty of those women who, as you insist, make up the majority that don’t call themselves feminists, still are very aware of the need to view men in many potentially threatening situations with great caution (ie, to be aware that they MIGHT commit rape/be rapists– which is NOT the same thing as assuming all men are rapists).

      Really, if you want a serious dialogue, don’t depend on deliberate misinterpretation or misrepresentation of what the writers write (or speakers say).

      And if you DON’T want a serious dialogue but just want to whine about how men are victims, go somewhere else.

      • Jun Kafiotties says:

        Do those same women assume black people to be criminals? Statistically black people are more likely to be imprisoned….

      • Several times over, he writes about rape:

        “. . .no woman can walk down the street and as she passes a man, know with certainty that he isn’t a threat.”

        “women generally do have to operate on the assumption that men are guilty until proven innocent.”

        “Men who grumble about being “guilty until proven innocent” are demanding to be seen as individuals, separate from their perceived sex. . . That’s a tempting but unreasonable demand to make.”

        “A man is entitled to a presumption of innocence from a jury in a courtroom, but not from his classmate with whom he tries to strike up what she ought to know is just an innocent conversation.”

        I very much doubt that you will respone but I wanted to, once again, demonstrate that I don’t make unsubstantiated claims, and that I only tell the unadulterated truth, no misrepresentation as you claim.

        • MorgainePendragon says:

          Sorry, which of those equates to:

          “all men [are] assumed to be rapists.”

          NONE. ZERO. NOTA. Not a single one of those quotes you list says that (using my own emphasis here): ALL men ARE assumed to be rapists.

          What they show is that in order to be vigilant, women must ALWAYS assume the POSSIBILITY of rape/assault.

          NOT that “ALL men ARE rapists” but that ANY man CAN be a rapist.

          And this includes non-strangers, friends, partners, former partners, even family members.

          So yes, I stand by my original observation that you often deliberately misquote and/or mis-interpret or misrepresent what writers write or speakers say.

          • Perhaps you should bone up on reading comprehension since the title of the article is: “ALL (all as in ALL, every single one, with no exceptions) Men Are Guilty Until Proven Innocent”

            THAT is the title of the article. ALL men ARE guilty, not MIGHT be guilty, ARE guilty. See if you can twist your way out of that. Be honest for a change.

            • MorgainePendragon says:

              Perhaps YOU “bone up on reading comprehension since the title of the article is”:

              IN RAPE CULTURE …”

              Do you not understand the concept of a modifier?

              Apparently not.

              And nice (NOT) way to deflect and derail when I provided evidence that showed your analysis to be flawed.

              Again, you’re clearly not interested in a dialogue, you’re only interested in winning. Seems that, for you, winning means continuing to find rationalisations for beliefs that leave you hostile, angry, unable to comprehend even the slightest challenged to those narrow beliefs, and able only to play “yes but” with any attempt at rational or critical discourse.

              If that’s what makes you happy, mate, go for it.

              Myself, I prefer to try to find common ground and learn and grow from such discussions.

  3. Only fuckheads would miss the point of this article; its very straightforward. Hugo is trying to say that women, especially women who have been the victims of assault (1/3 women in North America, its worse in underdeveloped nations; these statistics are NOT equal to men, who are assaulted, but on a much MUCH smaller scale), are taught to be fearful of men because our culture normalizes rape, assault, and harassment. Men who see how shitty it is to be a young women who is taught to be afraid by overwhelming statistics, realize that a woman is always on the defense because she wants to avoid becoming that statistic. Hugo is saying, stop being such a whiny asshole, let the women earn your trust, she is not obliged to smile at you on the street because she has no way of knowing who you are. Feminism has done a lot for women, men, racial groups, and gay rights, so Feminism is obviously not the problem. Stupid people are the problem. Not men, not women, not Feminism, ect–its stupid people! By the way, amazing article!

    • Your numbers are bunk. Feminism has done a lot for men. It has robbed men of equal rights, made it acceptable to victimize them, prevented any discussion of the disadvantages we face, etc, etc, etc. Stupid people… like you.

    • Peter Houlihan says:

      Yeah, look at all those idiots thinking that men are more likely to be assaulted or murdered on the street anywhere in the world. What were they reading? Academic studies? Police statistics? Clearly the inside of your head is a much much more reliable source of information.

    • Jun Kafiotties says:

      You realize the new CDC stats show 1.1% of women in the last 12 months had been raped, and 1.1% of men in the last 12 months were FORCED to penetrate someone (which I consider to be rape). In it also is that 79.2% of the male victims of forced to penetrate report female abusers, which would suggest there are A LOT more female rapists than we once assumed. It also shows quite a lot of the male sexual assault victims were assaulted by past or present intimate partners. Now women still suffered more sexual assaults, but the male assaults are still very significant to the point men should worry about their safety with women similar to women worrying about their safety with men. This isn’t a rare once in a blue moon occurrence anymore, it’s a common thing if the stats are correct.

      These guys are saying stop assuming women have it worse always, males are not as safe as you think. The CDC stats to me prove we should drop the female victim, male perp myth and start expanding our coverage because shockingly both genders suffer A LOT of abuse and female perps AND male victims are now statistically very important to acknowledge.

      It’s also time for the women to take responsibility along with the men, women to not force, coerce men into sex or commit any physical or sexual assault. I find it offensive that we continue to tell men to stop raping, but we aren’t telling women also to stop raping. Rape is not limited to 1 gender!

  4. It’s seems to me that Hugo is just asking us to defend the honor of a lady. Please someone, correct me if I’m wrong. Of course that implies a certain level of violence may be required to do so. Unusual requests coming from a feminist.

    • MorgainePendragon says:

      You’re wrong.

      • PursuitAce says:

        That’s succinct, but not very helpful. Let’s review. Hugo finished with…
        “There’s more to being a “good guy” than not raping women. Good guys hold themselves and other men accountable, in public and in private. That’s a high standard to meet, particularly for the young. But it’s only by meeting that standard that men can help to change the culture. And until we do that, our feelings of guilt will not be entirely undeserved.”
        This is an actionable paragraph, if I’m using the phrase properly. Hugo is asking men to educate men and intercede for women to prevent or end sexual assault and harassment. We used to call that, “defending the honor of a lady”. He’s also stating that without doing so our guilt is deserved. Now maybe you’re too young to remember when the phrase I used still remained in vogue. If there’s a dimes worth of difference between what Hugo wants and what I stated then please enlighten me. (No sarcasm is given or intended).

        • He’s not asking you to defend anyone. He’s asking you to hold yourself and other men accountable. So, for example, when one of your friends is bothering a woman who doesn’t want to be bothered, rather than shooing him away and asking her if she is okay (as if what she needs is the “right” kind of male attention), you’re better off educating him about why he needs to be shooed so that he doesn’t continue to bother women who do not want to be bothered.

          • How about this. How about you teach your female friends to approach men. Stop forcing men to take all the action, to initiate. Unfortunately, men have to do 99.9% of the approaching, which means that eventually a man is going to approach a woman who is not receptive to his approach. In fact, that will happen more often than not. Women need to, collectively, stop griping about “male attention” and start switching things around.

            P.S. saying hello to someone isn’t assault. Starting a conversation is not harassment. Somehow, women seem to think that a man trying to have a conversation with them when they don’t really want to talk is harassment. If that is what constitutes harassment, I get harassed ALL THE TIME as a man. I get harassed by the person standing behind me in line at the supermarket, the person asking directions on the street, etc, etc, etc.

            • PursuitAce says:

              Collin, we’re still in the phase where men need to do most of the changing. Nice try though. I’m still trying to figure out how dating (outside of online sites) occurs in the current culture. Since any unwanted advance can quickly fall under the sexual harassment category, aren’t we just encouraging bad behavior by the hit and miss method of people beginning relationships? Shouldn’t we develop some kind of go-no-go structure to clean up the sexual harassment culture that so many commentators have mentioned? Sorry. I’m just a “let’s fix the problem” kind of guy.

            • @Collin That attitude is part of the problem. Today women DO approach men if they want to. It is NOT up to men to pursue, to take all of the action and initiate. A man doing 99.9% of the approaching should take a step back and not be so aggressive. Because as you say, more often than not he is approaching women who are simply not interested.

              And if he truly believes it is his job at the man to initiate and the woman he has approached is not being initiated then oftentimes he feels he has to keep at it until it works. Because he’s a man and men have to be the ones to initiate… do you see the problem?

              Maybe 50% of the approaching is more than enough for either gender.

            • No, they really don’t. Women approach men extraordinarily rarely. I don’t know a single man who has been approached by a woman. Not one. I know of some men who have been approached by women, and I have talked to them about how many times they’ve been approached Vs. how many times they have approached and we’re looking at numbers at least 50:1. Women just don’t approach. Certainly not with any regularity. I would wager $10,000 that the number of women that approach more than they are approached is below 2%. If we further reduce that to count only women who are not morbidly obese, I would wager it is below 0.5%.

              If women were to regularly approach men and put themselves out there to get rejected, men would gladly approach less. There is no worse feeling in the world than getting rejected, but men have to deal with both rejection, but entitled women who think they can do whatever they please including accusing men of assaulting them when they simply aren’t interested. Or, in the case of a story that is running right next to this one, actually assaulting a man for simply saying hello.

            • I don’t know any women who would hesitate to ask out a man with whom she was interested. If you and your friends aren’t getting approached by women, maybe that says more about you than it does about women in general.

              Judging by your “morbidly obese” comment, the fact that you don’t seem to understand what harassment means and your seemingly trawler-net approach to meeting women, I conclude that you’re not the blue-ribbon prizes you think you are. Maybe instead of blaming all women, you should take a closer look at the way you are interacting with the world.

              For the record, if someone ~doesn’t want to talk to you~ and you keep trying to have a conversation with them, then you are harrassing them. It may not be criminal harrassment but it is annoying as hell. You should stop doing that.

            • Every woman claims she is the exception to the rule. Men are not asked out by women. We could do a poll of thousands of men, and you will find that well below 1% would have been asked out by women more than they have asked women out. This simply does not happen.

              You know nothing of my approach toward women. The women who are aggressive in approaching men are, in general, the ones who do not have men approach them because of some severe physical flaw (morbid obesity, for example).

              You can conclude whatever you like, but the simple fact of the matter is that I am an undeniably phenomenal catch.

            • Julie Gillis says:

              Or maybe they just are impatient. Why not go for something if you want it was my approach.

            • Okay so this is from a study a few months back in Psychology Today about people asking out other people for first dates (http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-how-and-why-sex-differences/201104 I can’t paste in the graph but if you look at the one titled: “Number of times subjected asked someone out on a date in the last year” that is the one I’m talking about.)

              If you add up the total number of times a first date was requested (by both men and women) You get a number somewhere around 130. Let’s call it 125 for ease of discussion. If you add up the number of time women asked out men, you get a number around 25. Which means that for about every 5 guys asking a gal out for a first date, 1 woman is asking out a man for a first date. Which bears out another stat from the study: “We also asked how many times the survey participants had been asked out on a first date in the past year. On average, males reported that they had been asked out about once. Females reported that, on average, they had been asked out about 5 times.” Both of those stats for women asking out men are 20%.

              So remember, for every five women you ask out, a woman somewhere is asking out a guy. If you’re not that guy and you want to be, maybe you should look at the way you are presenting yourself instead of whingeing about imaginary stats where less than 1% of women ask out guys and those women are all morbidly obese and flawed.

            • Julie Gillis says:

              So we are damned if we approach you and you are damned if you approach us. So that’s a stupid tricky little trap to be in. Don’t you think?
              If your experience is one particular way, change the variables. Don’t keep performing the same experiment over and over again expecting different results.

              Look for communities of people that are different than the ones you are currently in. Keep working on yourself because your posts here are so angry, so bitter. If even a 10th of that is coming out in your interactions or if you’ve sufficiently internalized a whole lot of BS about never looking women in the eyes (of course she’ll think you are creepy if you are acting like you aren’t trying to be a creep instead of just enjoying who YOU ARE), well….I suspect people around you are sensing these feelings and deciding something is up.

              Do you like yourself? Do you enjoy talking to lots of different people? Do you believe people like you? That’s pretty much what makes other people attracted to you and there isn’t anything in the PUA handbooks that can make that internal experience happen for you.

              I don’t know where you’ve gotten your lessons on feminism but it’s nothing like how I was raised. I like men. A lot. And I like women and I like equality and humanity and fighting for peace. Whatever you’ve learned it’s nothing that I recognize.

            • Julie Gillis says:

              Wow, Collin, that’s quite a couple of comments. For the record? I’ve been asking men out since 1985, since I was 16. Sometimes it was successful. Sometimes it was not. Women asking men out doesn’t stop men from deciding to sexually assault women or harass them. That’s apples to oranges. People who rape, rape no matter if women (or men) approach them or not. A lack of being approached is not necessarily a correlation to becoming a rapist.
              I can’t even begin to unpack your comment about women who are obese. Do you mean they approach men? Cause they are fat? Collin, really.
              I know a lot of women. A lot of them. All of them at one time in their life have asked a man out. Or woman if they are gay. There well may be a sector of women out there who wouldn’t deign to do so for some godforsaken conservative “good girl” BS mentality, but most of the women I know act when they like someone.
              Or maybe we are all just gross Omega women, huh Collin.
              I get it. You are angry about your life, Collin. But your life isn’t everyone’s and some people have a much different experience. I can’t tell you how angry comments like that make me when I look around college campuses and see gals asking me out right and left. When I see women (friends) on dating sites, when I relate my own story of chasin’ down my husband.
              There is a wide wide world out there of so many different experiences and you are creating a tiny box of them to judge the world by.
              Makes me mad for you Collin and I don’t even know you. I want more for you.

            • Julie Gillis says:

              Gah! “Gals asking men out right and left.” There are not that many gals asking me out :)-

            • Like every other woman, you claim you are the exception to the rule. How many times have you asked men out? How many times have men asked YOU out? Even on college campuses, and in real life, men are the ones who initiate. That’s just the way it works. It is the way it works on dating websites, it is the way it works in bars, in libraries, in clubs, in bookstores, in coffee shops, in every single location where men and women meet. Men do THE VAST MAJORITY of the initiation. Period. That is a fact.

              Women who don’t get approached because of a serious physical flaw like morbid obesity are more likely to ask men, yes. That’s pretty simple. There is nothing to “unpack” there, it is common sense. I love the fact that you feminists can’t even accept the fact that men do the vast majority of initiation. It is not a matter up for dispute.

              I’ve not even turned 23, so I am fairly familiar with what life is like on college campuses. And life on college campuses is men asking women out. Men initiating with women. Sure, women will occasionally initiate with a guy, but when that happens it is a shocking occurrence. There is a reason guys joke amongst ourselves about women initiating… because it NEVER happens.

              I’m mad too. Mad I was indoctrinated with feminist bullshit as a child, and I have since grown up basically acting the way all feminists say men should be at it has left me miserable and alone. Just like every other boy who suffered the gravest misfortune of being indoctrinated with feminist trash growing up. If a man’s utmost concern is to not make a woman uncomfortable and to make she sure is enjoying herself and make sure that you don’t do anything that is not explicitly condoned, that man will NEVER get a date or a relationship. In order to get dates, men are required to not be too concerned about a woman’s lack of comfort. Going in for a kiss is something that could cause a woman to be uncomfortable. Maybe she doesn’t want to be kissed? Unfortunately, men who are concerned about the comfort and enjoyment of women are ignored and viewed as weak by women. Then you have people to turn to the PUA folks just because they’ve been so indoctrinated by feminists and taught by women how to date women, that they need to be completely reprogrammed in order to get any success. But we’re just pigs, right?

              I have more female friends than male friends, and that’s because I make the perfect friend, apparently. Kind, considerate to a fault, gentlemanly ALWAYS, and incredibly generous. Those matter for nothing if I’m concerned about a woman’s comfort when potentially initiating contact. The simple fact is that if a man EVER wants a date, he has to risk making a woman uncomfortable by initiating in a blind situation without knowledge of whether she wants it or not. Do you know what waiting for women to approach results in? A lonely existence.

            • Julie Gillis says:

              Collin, I’ve never really counted. I’d suspect it’s 60/40 with me being the 60% because I am an assertive flirty girl and always have been. But I suppose you’d tell me that’s because I have some kind of terrible horrible flaw, like all the rest of the flawed women I seem to know. Funny, how lovely I think many of them are. Huh.

              What you keep failing to see is that some of us women think its stupid that men have to do all the initiating. Do you get that? That we are happy to ask me out, pay for dates (OMG I’ve paid for dates! Because I asked the man out! He paid on the next date! And then I did!), have sex and generally have a good time being people.

              See, that’s the feminist claptrap I was raised with. Act like you are both people. Enjoy each other as people. But again, I’m flawed and old Collin, yes? Dating in the 80’s and 90’s was a dream. I have NO idea who these people are that say women don’t ask men out. I’ve never seen it. Then again, I’m in the arts field, filled with hard core liberals, actors, painters, dancers, politicos, and happily it’s got more than its fair share of LGBTQ influence so I’ll admit that perhaps I live in an outlier land. I guess if you are trying to run with the traditional conservative “upwardly” mobile types you’ll run into BS gender stuff. I’d branch out you guys. 😉

              Collin, You’ve done a huge back and forth about being a good catch but also about hating yourself or not believing people when they tell you they find you attractive. You’ve said some amazingly dark things and god knows I have no reason I’ve reached out to you before and I’ll do it again here. I’d love to email you and talk and I’ve been resisting because it seemed rude, but maybe I’ll find a way to make a first move and we can break some of this down off line, with a whole lot less bitter anger flying around. See? I’m making the first move to talk to you Collin. Go to my website in the link here, go to Contact, and email me. Let’s talk about this like real people, flaws and all.

            • Julie Gillis says:

              “God knows I have no reason to expect you’ll respond.” No coffee 😉

            • Henry Vandenburgh says:

              What most women do is give you subtle signs they’re interested. This culture is so incredibly sex negative that the signs are usually one tick this side of deniable. I think it’s mainly due to other women policing the “marriage/sex market.” Unfortunately I think the more and more omnibus nature of “sexual harrassment” law and culture has also added to this effect. Some women now believe (I’ve heard them say this) that ANY flirtation is sexual harrassment. Including by a woman toward a man. Sexual harrassment used to be mainly quid pro quo. Now it’s anything. I think the concept should be junked. By the way, I think the workplace or campus can be a much safer place to find partners than bars (which are often referenced here.) In spite of some obnoxious anomalies like fraternity/bro-culture.

            • Collin,

              I took a feminist studies course in university and never at any time was I taught anything about dating…haha…but it’s funny that you seem to believe that’s what it’s all about. I’ll let my professor know that we’re missing a vital part of the curriculum. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, feminism is about addressing, appreciating and celebrating women, women’s issues and other women related matters, which may include men, but not in the man-hating way you seem to believe, but mostly it’s about women. Please STOP mis-representing feminism! You don’t know anything about it. Yes there are some bad apples, who do use feminism to promote man-hating, but like any other movement feminism is not perfect and you are welcome to help change that if you like, but not before you educate yourself more thoroughly on the subject matter first.

              Secondly, I’m sorry you feel that nice guys finish last because that is certainly not the case. I know this sounds high-schoolish, but just BE YOURSELF and stop worrying so much about what other people are thinking. I think therein lies your problem, not that you’re a nice guy, but that you’re an overly-self conscious guy and you can’t blame feminism or anything or anyone else for that. Even if you could, it’s still not going to get you what you want. Believe me I’ve tried, blaming the whole world for my problems and maybe I was justified, maybe I wasn’t, but something I’ve learned is nobody like hanging out with angry and bitter.

              You gotta find a way to accept yourself for who you are, be proud of it and say screw everybody else! Now that’s hot!

              Good luck :)

            • Lela:
              From my observations: women do not initiate approaches.

              It may be MARGINALLY better than say 25 years ago, but only by a little bit.

              When I brought up this point to another woman on this very web-site, she mentioned all the cultural baggage that comes when women approach.

              1) if a woman approaches she appears easy, gold-digging, etc..
              2) if she is turned down, she now appears desperate and ugly

              It can’t be BOTH ways. It can’t be that women have a GOOD excuse to not approach (not that the excuse was necessarily good, but she actually opened my eyes. She stated this in a heartfelt manner and it made me have a little window into understanding why women don’t approach and feel less annoyed by it) AND be approaching as much as men.

              If you dont’ know any woman who WON’T HESITATE to approach, then this is most likely a peculiarity of your little group (i.e. you’re not representative of women as a whole).

              I would say a generous portion of women from 18 to 24 might fit your profile, but after that age those women were raised in a more culturally conservative time. It gets worse as it gets higher.

              Also, the balance shifts in the dating scene as you move into the 30’s and 40’s as men hit their prime in earning power (and gain confidence from work well done or learning a skill, or just generally improving themselves as a person) whereas women’s beauty is failing.

              In short I think it’s possible that your group is simply non-representative of the average woman.

            • Julie Gillis says:

              Well then I’d start looking to date within different groups. If the women in your dating scene are conservative, looking to “marry up” kind of people, more worried about appearances than connection, stop trying to date them. Look at other communities with other types of people.

            • Julie:
              You’re not even responding to my comments. I’m not even sure what you’re talking about.

              I feel like I just said “nice weather” and you responded “explain why don’t you like egg salad?”

              For the record I am married.

            • Julie Gillis says:

              You mentioned peculiarities of little groups. I’m positing that different groups might have different norms in terms of assertiveness in dating. That your observations of women asking (or not asking) men out might be indicative how the cultural norms in groups you frequent.
              I have, for the, last 20-25 years seen more equity of dating and mating in the groups that I frequent.
              As for your two points-
              Most of the men I know don’t consider women to be gold digging or easy if they say, hey I’d love to get dinner with you.
              If I am/was turned down I don’t feel desperate, I just figure he’s not attracted to me like that. Just like if I turn down someone it’s not a summation of their character, it just means there wasn’t a spark.
              Also, the last paragraph about power? See that’s not representative of the people I hang out with. We don’t focus on money as a thing that creates “alpha status” and none of the people I know personally think a woman in their 40’s is “faded” because we value each other for more than those stereotypical traits.
              Men have more to offer than money. Women have more to offer that beauty. When you live in that world (when you actually, gasp, LIKE the people around you for who they are) you have so many more options for dating, mating and relating and it’s pretty awesome than the scenarios I keep seeing described.
              So, my advice, limited as it might be would be break out of your traditional viewpoints about how and who to date. Not you personally I guess, but in general. Because I think we all think we are “the norm” in society, our little groups/bubble/experience.
              And there are so many other ways of being in this huge country.
              Is that a more detailed explanation?

            • John D:

              I readily admit that I live in a very privileged Ivory Tower of a society where rape culture is generally frowned upon by men and by women, where we generally tend to treat each other with honor and respect. And we ask each other out if we feel like it no matter the gender.

              Doesn’t that sound better than a society that socializes antiquated, harmful and disrespectful gender stereotypes?

              Just from your post, you describe men with active and aggressive verbs men earn, gain, work, learn, improve… They’re powerful go-getters. When you talked about women you only acknowledged them in terms of their physical attribute: youthful beauty, over which they have no control because try as we might we all age no matter what we do. They are passive objects.

              See? That kind of thinking is indicative of rape culture which tells men they have to be powerful and aggressive and go after women to get sex. While women have to be passive and coy and not too easy. Of course in that culture women can’t ask out men and men have to be the one to make all the moves.

              But that’s silly. And it’s harmful to men and to women. I don’t want to live in that culture. You don’t want to live in that culture. So let’s all get rid of that stupid culture.

            • MorgainePendragon says:

              “How about you teach your female friends to approach men.”

              How about THIS? How about YOU teach your male friends that when women WANT to approach them (you?) we WILL.

              If we’re doing something else– ie, reading a book, talking or texting on a phone, waiting for a bus, walking down the street on our way somewhere– LEAVE US ALONE.

              We’ll let you know when we want to be approached.

            • Jun Kafiotties says:

              Judging by how many women I hear whinging of men not appoaching them (and how he’s a coward for it?), I’m not sure how this will work. We would have to simultaneously encourage women to ask out men, whilst discouraging men to approach women?

              I’d say it’s a good idea to work out what a decent way to approach someone is, and encourage both genders to do this. Maybe start with a hello would be a good idea, ensure the vocal tone is calm and non-threatening, ensure the approacher isn’t blocking off exits, both sit down if you can and ensure adequate distance apart. I agree on the reading a book, texting on phone, however waiting for a bus? If you don’t look visibly occupied or annoyed then I find it strange to want people to never initiate a convo then.

              How exactly are you going to let them know when to be approached? Does this follow with guys too, do you both sit back and yell out OK IT’S SAFE TO APPROACH. How about a polite no thanks, to go along with better approaching skills for everyone. People have the right to converse with others, many people have great convo’s whilst waiting for a bus, being on a bus etc. People also have the right to refuse to converse and that’s fine too, but I wouldn’t have that as the automatic unless you want an anti-social society.

            • No, you won’t. But hey, keep that idea in your head alive, you seem like a real treat. I like your suggestion that men wait for women to approach. Our very species would be extinct in one generation if men waited for women to approach.

          • PursuitAce says:

            I don’t have any friends who would be bothering any women. So Hugo is asking me to hold strangers accountable. Or maybe he’s not. Unless a crime is being committed, I’m just supposed to hold accountable my friends? I mean let’s get down to where the rubber meets the road. Because I may be the rubber and the other guy(s) may be the road.

            • It’s great that you and you’re friends don’t bother women. It really doesn’t seem that you would, from the level of respect with which you seem to even approach an on-line forum. That’s great.

              I think he’s asking you to hold that antiquated cultural attitude accountable, not specific men. A culture that insists men have to be aggressive and persuasive while women are expected to be passive and submissive, well… that just leads to trouble, doesn’t it? I think if you read through some of these replies to this story you’ll see that a lot of guys still buy into it.

          • He is asking for men to defend ladies honour by ratcheting up a already existing lynch mob mentality that surrounds accusations of rape by and rape of women.

  5. Good Guy Greg says:

    As a ‘nice’ guy I get what everybody is trying to say but I say this with a bias. Women point the finger at all men for the reasons stated above. Fine, I get that. But I would be a liar if I haven’t seen most girls I know go for a guy who is abusive or put themselves in situations where sexual abuse is a very real consequence. I don’t mean to say women are stupid, but if you know there’s bad apples, and everyone is telling you that they are then it is unfair to blame all men for your own stupidity. I’m not saying that ‘wearing a miniskirt=rape’ because that’s real dumb. I’m saying there isn’t a lack of good guys, and according to many women can make their own decisions and don’t need a man to validate themselves. But why is that all I see? We can blame society, but that’s like pointing at a cloud and blaming it for raining on you when you could be inside.

  6. Bluntly, women fear men because men are physically bigger and can thus hurt them. It’s a generalization but it’s also common sense.
    Guys, if you were walking down a dark street alone and a man several inches taller than you with 60 pounds or so on you and who was more physically intimidating than you gave you a little more attention than a random stranger normally would… how would you react? Would you put up your guard and assume he was a potential threat? Or would you assume he was friendly because, you know, statistically speaking most people aren’t muggers? It’s not just because you are male, it’s because you really are a physical threat. And in a society which glorifies violence and teaches young men that aggressive men are more attractive to women (not true by the way), it’s not a surprise that what a young man considers flirting, might make a young woman feel threatened.

    • “Bluntly, women fear men because men are physically bigger and can thus hurt them. It’s a generalization but it’s also common sense.”

      This. Exactly. And truth be told, I have seen men who are walking through unfamiliar possibly sketchy areas definately take notice of and take action to avoid men whom are larger/more intimidating than they are if given even the *slightest* reason or even feel to do so. It IS common sense.

      That said, there is a fine line…and its one humans, not just women, have to walk. I personally go by the theory that you shouldn’t trust anyone until they’ve earned it, male or female, but simple politeness is merely that. The majority of men are not rapists or abusers, and most of those whom are? Well, stranger rape is a lot more uncommon than rapes committed by men the women know to some degree…so really, the chances of a guy who is merely saying hello to you or giving you a nod on the street (especially durring the middle of the day, or at a counter, or some place where there are other people are around) is going to rape you are pretty slim. Society does a great job of not only telling men to be paranoid about being mistaken for a rapist, but telling women there are rapists waiting for them around every single corner, in every bush, in every parking lot, sitting at the next table over, and everywhere else and if they so much as LOOK at a man, well, they may be walking right into getting raped. Like that sorta thing doesn’t have an affect on the female mind too, you know?

      A fair inbetween might be “Hey, I as a female will not assume y’all are rapist and try and get my friends to consider that line of thinking if you, as a male, will not assume a hello is anything but a hello and try and get y’alls friends to do the same.” Then we could all be polite to eachother in elevators and shit and the world would be a far more mellow place.

    • Peter Houlihan says:

      I’d say Hi, smile and answer whatever question hes asking me. If hes not going to mug me, well and good, if he is, I didn’t change a thing by looking at him.

      • @ Peter Okay, now assume that he is not thinking about your wallet but is instead thinking about your sweet little tush. Does that change your urge to smile at him and be open to his possible advances?

        • So now you are homophobe and believe that all men are too? If he wants to look at my ‘sweet little tush’ (and thank you for the compliment) he can go ahead and do so. If he want to approach me and even dare to hit on me (he better be cute…) I will politely decline. I thankfully do not suffer from ‘no skin syndrome’ whereby if someone looks at me, or even exists in a way I don’t like, I would fly into a panic of fear and anxiety.
          Making other people responsible for your fears is irresponsible.

        • Jamie Parsons says:

          You have to right to assume he is a rapist. Saying that a girl I haven’t met yet has a right to think I’m guilty, just because I am a man, is ridiculous and very offensive. People seem to be using the ‘1 in 4 women are assaulted’ line to mean ‘1 in 4 men are guilty of assault’. Don’t be stupid.

          • Okay, maybe this is an analogy you can understand better. Telling a woman she is stupid to be wary of men who are bigger and more aggressive than she is in a culture that encourages men to be aggressive and dominate her is like telling an undersized, timid middle school boy that it is stupid to be wary of the bigger aggressive boys in the locker room of a school with a history of tolerating bullying because not every boy is a bully.

            Yes, not every boy is a bully and not every man is overly aggressive towards women. But when you are vulnerable, you are not worried that EVERY single one is, you are worried that ONE of them is. And how are you supposed to know who the bad one is

            It is prudent to be wary of things that can hurt you and have a precedent of hurting others. If you find it insulting, then maybe what you should do is what the article suggests: make an effort to change a culture that supports aggressive, unwanted behavior as normal. Just like you would if you were one of the good bigger boys in that middle school locker room where small boys were afraid of getting bullied, right? You’d make sure bullying wasn’t accepted behavior and wasn’t considered cool, wouldn’t you?

            • Lela,

              I believe you are correct to be wary of men in secluded areas. I am a man. I’ve rarely been worried for my safety (from random strangers), but as I age it seems to be more important in my mind.

              I think it would only be natural.

              My objection is when feminists react with vitriol when people give women common sense advice to keep themselves safe. When people give women advice like not dressing provacatively or getting too drunk, or staying with friends, minding their drinks (against getting spiked) feminists typically spout off “How come it’s incumbent upon her to worry about preventing rape? Why don’t we teach men NOT TO RAPE??”
              Or often they say it’s men’s jobs to reduce the rape culture.

              Feminists have this idea that if a woman gets raped, it’s because a “normal” man lost control and the issue is male privilege and the very low ranking rape has on law enforcement’s radar, and because this same guy heard another man laugh at a rape joke so it’s okay to rape.

              When in fact, the objective reality is that nearly all women are raped by criminal-minded men who are dysfunctional and have an inability to feel guilt, remorse or empathy and often commit additional crimes against both men and women.

              I am sick of this deliberate attempt to conflate normal male libido and rape.

              This kind of feminist perspective is ALL OVER the internet.

            • Case in point: I’m now 45 and have had an ACL reconstruction a couple of weeks ago. As I become less able to defend myself, I do think more in terms of my own personal safety.

            • But John, it’s not common sense advice. Just think about it. If the way a woman dresses really causes rape then wouldn’t bikini clad women on the beach be raped just all of the freakin time? They’re not. They’re not raped anymore than women bundled up in big puffy layers on ski slopes.

              Because the way women dress does not cause rape.

              “Feminists have this idea that if a woman gets raped, it’s because a “normal” man lost control…” No that is rape culture saying that. It normalizes rape by saying that rape is just something guys do. That the way a woman dresses causes a normal guy to lose control. See? Telling a woman that the way she dresses will cause a guy to rape her or not, also tells a guy that guys rape women because of the way women dress. Is that really what you want to believe? Do you want to believe that one day you will be walking down the street and see a young woman in a short skirt and rape her because.. because well, she shouldn’t have been wearing that skirt.

              But more importantly what rape culture is also doing is telling the rapist that it wasn’t his fault. He couldn’t be expected to control himself, she was wearing a short skirt and how many times do people have to tell her not to look so darn attractive. To him, if she was making an effort to be attractive, then she was obviously asking for it. The scariest thing about rapists is that they think what they do is normal. A culture that tells women that their clothing choices cause rape, validates a rapist’s twisted thinking.

            • “all women are raped by criminal-minded men who are dysfunctional and have an inability to feel guilt”

              Care to back up this insight into the minds of all rapists?

  7. I got mugged by a black person once. Does that give me a license to treat every black person with suspicion?

    • No.

      • Peter Houlihan says:

        That directly contradicts the post you made immediately above this. If its ok to treat men with suspicion because they’re more likely to assault you than a woman, then its ok to do the same with a black person for the same reasons. If its not ok for one, its equally unacceptable for the other.

        • The analogies would be more comparable if you were saying that a woman was assaulted by a male so now she is afraid of all males, including children and males physically unable to harm her. THAT would be like being afraid of all black people because a black person assaulted you. Both would be irrational prejudices.

          Here’s the bit that people keep glossing over, though. And it’s key.

          When picturing GudEnuf’s faceless back assailant, who did you picture? An eight year old girl? An eighty-nine year old man? A five foot nothing teenaged girl? Or did you picture a strapping young man, say late teens to mid-30’s? And if I ask you to picture a white mugger who do you picture? Probably the same kind of strapping young man, I would bet.

          The hard truth is that most violent crimes are committed by able-bodied men in that age-range. So both women and men of all races and backgrounds are wary of aggressive men in that age-range. There shouldn’t be anything surprising or insulting about that. And it’s not gender profiling.

          Unfortunately for women (and gay men), men in that age-range are also usually the ones they want to date. So things get complicated, fast. And women are generally more vulnerable because men generally have not only a size advantage on them but also an advantage in experience with physical altercations. Plus, our culture tells men that they need to be sexually aggressive with women.

          Of course women are going to be wary. Rightly so.

          It’s a recipe for disaster. As a culture we all need to work on recognizing the problems and changing our attitudes.

          • A strapping young black man is more likely to commit assault than a strapping young white man. Does this give me the right to be prejudiced against strapping young black men?

            As I said in my comment that got deleted: a black person is far more likely to assault a white person than vice versa. If it’s okay to discriminate against men on the basis of statistics, it’s okay to discriminate against black people.

            • Wow. You are really trying hard to not get this.

              If you are alone in your dorm at Harvard with your sleeping wealthy polite generous helpful kind prestigious-fellowship-winning international molecular-biology-grad-student roommate at 3am and you are wary that he’s going to mug you because he is black so you go sleep next door where there are other people… then you are a racist f**kwad and that is NOT okay. (You’ll notice that you are basing you assessment of potential danger on one factor which does not in itself correlate to the danger you fear.)

              If you are alone on the A train with an unknown able-bodied bigger-than-you aggressive 18-34-year-old poorly-dressed drug-addled disrespectful socio-economically-disadvantaged black man at 3am and you are wary that he’s going to mug you because he fits most of the characteristics of the profile of a person most likely to commit violent robbery on an A train at 3am according to recent NYPD data so you go to sit in the next car where there are other people… then you are being prudent and that is okay. (You’ll notice that you are basing your assessment of potential danger on a variety of factors which correlate to actual data from a reliable source on current trends concerning the danger you fear.)

              Is that specific enough for you to understand?

  8. The analogy to race is wrong, but there’s a way to make it right. It’s not that women are like whites treating men like blacks. It’s that women are like blacks driving in a white neighborhood being asked to trust the police who pull them over. In 1962.

    Women get raped just like blacks got lynched. Were blacks wrong for not trusting whites in the pre-civil rights era?

    • OK, that’s a fine analogy as well, but I’d ask you to explain why the aforementioned one is wrong. It’s the same principle.

      The situation of women today is NOT comparable to blacks in the civil rights era, by the way.

      • Sorry for the double post, but I wanted to clarify. You, and others who attempt to justify this (but really, it’s mostly you) always defend it on rational, factual grounds- that is, given the realities of violent assault, etc. You defend it on a micro level, that is, the likelihood of something happening during any given altercation

        And frankly, I can get behind that. Men are larger than women and are generally more aggressive, so really, it’s just common sense and long articles like this aren’t necessary to justify such caution. Hell, even as a man, I’m more cautious around other men than women. If I passed a Shaq-sized fellow on a quiet street, I’d watch him more carefully than a woman or a smaller man.

        But of course that opens up a can of worms. Black people commit a disproportionate amount of crime in this country. (Of course, this is down to poverty and latent racism rather than any natural proclivity, but regardless). So therefore, the “black mugger” analogy is very apt, because we’re talking on an individual level- ie, the odds of something happening right now. And the odds are affected by race. Is that racist? You know, I’m really not sure. It’s an interesting question.

      • MorgainePendragon says:

        “The situation of women today is NOT comparable to blacks in the civil rights era, by the way.”

        No, in many ways it’s worse. During the civil rights/Jim Crow era (which is more what you’re talking about, I believe), African Americans (men at least) could go home and be relatively sure they would be safe, at least from violence, bullying and abuse from people who claim/ed to love them, in their own homes.

        Many women today in both the “developing” and the “developed” do not have that same surety. In fact, they’ve never had it.

        • According to all the peer-reviewed evidence-based DV studies, about an equal number of men cannot feel safe in their homes either.

        • A significant number of men also cannot go home safe, anywhere up to an equal amount of men and women depending on the stats you view. This is where the prejudice starts to fail.
          .
          I really do not understand why women fail to understand the concept that men the majority victim of violence in total, there are plenty of stats on it. DV is not the only violence in the world. Stranger to stranger, men are most likely going to go ruin a man’s day, the only benefit men have is a society-wide ignorance to this fact (but really it’s a negative).

          I’m detecting the women here commenting seem to want to be seen as the more vulnerable, the bigger victim, and the men simply want to be seen as victims AS WELL as women/as in both being at risk which means the prejudice itself against 1 gender is bad. There is enough evidence that both men and women get abused by men and women significantly, only difference is men are more likely to be both victim and perp with stranger based assaults.

    • A_Survivivor_of_Assault says:

      Hugo’s deleting comments that talk about how black-on-white assault is far more common that white-on-black assault. So much for caring about survivors.

    • Actually, I am curious as to why the analogy is stomped on so quickly. If a woman has been raped or abused by a man, it is a natural assumption she is going to be nervous around/untrusting of men, even though the act was merely committed by ONE man, not all of them. If a person is mugged or harmed by a person of a different race, why is it suddenly LESS natural to assume they are just naturally, at least for a period of time, going to be nervous around/less trusting of people of that race, even though it was merely one person who did it to them? People get VERY up in arms when this sort of analogy is made…and well, I call bullshit. Being afraid of a whole section of people based on race or sex or any other thing is not necessarily rational, but when one has been traumatized, they’ve been traumatized, and often times being rational when dealing with it is not something that just simply happens over night.

      • Irrational responses to traumatic events are very human and eminently forgivable. Not moving past that irrationality is not.

      • You realize those men who think all women are out to cheat on them, gold dig etc, have broken trust as well and suffered through something traumatic enough usually to be legitimate as well in prejudice against women? and vice versa.

    • Hugo,

      In the progressive era blacks got lynched because of false allegations of rape by women, like men do today.

      Women feared black rapists because of progressive era black brute propaganda just like women are made paranoid by feminist male brute propaganda.

      And women rape men at least as often as men rape women.

      “but the evidence presented here shows that as many as 7% of women self-report the use of physical force to obtain sex, 40% self-report sexual coercion, and over 50% self-report initiating sexual contact with a man while his judgment was impaired by drugs or alcohol (Anderson, 1998). Given these numbers, it is appropriate to conclude that women’s sexual aggression now represents a usual or typical pattern (i.e., has become normal), within the limits of the data reviewed in this paper. ”
      h t t p://www.ejhs.org/volume5/deviancetonormal.htm

      Stop being such a macho cliche Hugo. Stop taking away women’s agency so you can appear to use yours to save them.
      h t t p://www.genderratic.com/?p=449#comments

      • Well, I’d hate to stomp on your parade, but many of the black men lynched (not all) really did rape white women because they felt it was justifiable since the “white man” put them in that position anyway. Ever heard of Eldridge Cleaver? He was one such man accused who really did rape white women and wasn’t afraid to glorify this in his writings.

        • Wow.   So, because ONE black man admitted to raping white women “as “an insurrectionary act” (as he phrased it), MANY black men rape white women for that reason? 

          That’s a very serious accusation unless you have very solid evidence.

          Do you actually have evidence that “MANY black men raped white women”, or are you with a chapter of the KKK, determined to generalize  black men as savage rapists of white women?

          • MorgainePendragon says:

            OK, Eric, for once I’m with you. That’s a SERIOUS allegation.

            It seems to me that the threat of being raped by a black man may have been useful in creating an aura of fear and threat around white women (remember, this period in US history corresponds to post WWII era, when women who had been called to serve their country by doing “men’s” jobs and enjoyed the economic and social freedom that entailed had been forced back into the home– and many resented it) to intimidate them into accepting white male dominance (and protection) again.

            Considering the stats of the post-Civil Rights era that show that most violent crime occurs within the same race– and especially with rape, where black men are much more likely to sexually assault black women, not white women; although I don’t know if the reverse holds true about white men?– I can’t IMAGINE that black men would have been more likely to rape white women. The very atmosphere around it would have been terrifying, right?

            I think it much more likely that white men (and some women) USED that excuse and made black men scapegoats, much as is illustrated in To Kill a Mockingbird.

    • So his race analogy is wrong, but yours is right just because you said so? Sorry, Hugo, it doesn’t work that way.

    • Peter Houlihan says:

      I agree, the analogy of race to gender is wrong in many ways:

      I don’t think anyone would argue that blacks are endowed with any worthwhile privileges on account of their race. Equally whites aren’t exactly opressed.

      Women, on the other hand, are engendered many worthwhile privileges to which men have no access, and men, no matter how the Hugos of this world like to downplay it, are very definitely opressed in many ways.

      Gender is a much more equal opportunity field for opression and privilege than race is. If I had to pick to be born white or black, I know exactly what I’d choose. If I had to choose male or female… tough call.

      That said, in some instances its a perfect analogy. If over the top mistrust of black people is wrong and racist, then over the top mistrust of men is wrong and sexist. By all means women should protect themselves and put themselves first, but when that is extended to “don’t be polite to strangers” theres something very wrong.

    • “The analogy to race is wrong, but there’s a way to make it right. It’s not that women are like whites treating men like blacks. It’s that women are like blacks driving in a white neighborhood being asked to trust the police who pull them over. In 1962.

      Women get raped just like blacks got lynched. Were blacks wrong for not trusting whites in the pre-civil rights era?”

      Analogies can be useful to illustrate a point – and the same analogy can be changed in many different ways to make new points, counter arguments and even score debating points – as any member of a high school debating team knows only too well!

      The issue I see is not that High School debating tactics can be fruitless – it’s that History Teaching is not what it used to be!

      Those Who Fail To Learn The Lessons Of History (or Herstory) Are Doomed To Repeat Them!

      It’s 50 years on from 1962 – and if people are still not learning the lessons from then – that’s two generations plus down the drain! If lessons aint being learned and better analogies have not been created in the last 50 years, its getting near time when the last one to leave should turn the lights out!

    • DavidByron says:

      “Women get raped just like blacks got lynched”

      Actually the majority of victims of lynching were white males. Then black males. A tiny number of women also.

      But your statement is accurate because men get raped more than women.

    • The analogy to race is wrong, but there’s a way to make it right. It’s not that women are like whites treating men like blacks. It’s that women are like blacks driving in a white neighborhood being asked to trust the police who pull them over. In 1962.

      Women get raped just like blacks got lynched. Were blacks wrong for not trusting whites in the pre-civil rights era?
      Then let’s put it in real world terms.

      How would black and latino guys reconcile the demand to not be presumed guilty for their race with the demand to not be presumed guilty because of their gender.

      If we are supposed to be all about treating people fairly then wouldn’t it only be fair to not make either presumption rather than trying to reach for excuses to justify presumptions made about certain groups despite the fact that only a very small minority of that group is actually committing the behavior that gets the entire group condemned while at the same properly calling foul on presumptions about other groups?

      Let’s not waste time trying to analogize women with blacks and men with white. Instead let’s talk about how its unfair to make presumptions about women, black, men, and whites.

      Men who grumble about being “guilty until proven innocent” are demanding to be seen as individuals, separate from their perceived sex and the history that goes with it. That’s a tempting but unreasonable demand to make.
      Is that an unreasonable demand when any one of any group makes it or only certain groups?

  9. I hate the assumption that people have to smile at strangers walking down the hall. Maybe I’m not scared of you, maybe i just have other things on my mind besides grinning like an idiot or “working the room”.
    I’ve heard men voice their frustration at people insisting that they smile too. I think this is a extrovert VS introvert deal. But the physical power dynamics comes into play when it’s a man trying to get a woman to just “come out of your shell and smile a bit, dear”.

    • PursuitAce says:

      Yeah, I used to hate that, too. Now, when it’s a man, I give some kind of smile back. When it’s a woman I’m less likely to be looking at her, because I don’t want to intimidate her. If she’s not the intimidating kind she won’t care anyways. However, if our eyes meet she will either smile or like yourself, just be looking in my direction. If she smiles, I don’t smile back but I will nod to acknowledge her. If she doesn’t I’ll just look away and keep doing whatever I’m doing. Kind of complicated, but it keeps everyone happy.

    • Peter Houlihan says:

      I’ve no problem with strange women not smiling at me when I walk past. Frankly it’d be a bit weird if they all did. But changing seats when I sit down? Eyeing me nervously on the train? It gets a bit wearing after a while.

  10. This article is ridiculous. It espouses collective punishment for half the earth’s population. And I thought that collective punishment in general was outlawed by the Geneva Convention. A sexist piece of crap if I’ve ever read one.

    • Kalebb

      Unfortunately the Geneva conventions do not apply as there has been no formal deceleration of warfare and no recognition of hostilities under International law. More’s the pity!

      If there was a deceleration of warfare in effect and The Conventions did apply it would radically change The Gender Landscape in the USA.

      The definition of such things as rape would have to follow international case law and so many arguments would be moot! The US is about 20 years behind the Internationale standards and definitions!

      The CDC report is in fact the first US based report that has even come near adopting international standards – something which the FBI so recently failed in when they re drafted the definition of rape they work to.

      So – I’m sorry to say The Geneva Conventions don’t apply – and if they did I can just see whole rows of startled rabbits in the head lights and so many asking “What The F###?” – Squished!

    • QuantumInc says:

      This is hardly calling for the punishment of men. Maybe punishment when a guy says something sexist. It does ask for one to excuse a woman’s excessive caution (which is debatable) but mainly the actual call to action is for men to root out the rapists in their ranks which is not up for debate. It should be completely obvious, but because of ingrained rape culture it somehow isn’t. When a guy, even your best bud, says something that implies that it is ever acceptable to force, coerce, or trick a woman into spreading her legs…THAT IS BAD.

  11. Hey, I dont much care anymore. I’d rather just leave men alone socialize in female only places.
    I don’t give men the benefit of the doubt,and I do assume they’re viewing porn, which is rape training.
    I don’t see men cleaning up their acts any time soon. Rape, war, terrorism, street crime, teenage boys being horrifying harassers… in the meantime, I want my own space free of men, free of worry… let men own up to the evil … or maybe just pass a few laws saying women can carry loaded guns and men cannot and if a man was shot it’s always his fault for causing the woman to shoot the gun in the first place.
    Good article Hugo….you’re usually a complete sexist, but this time you finally got it right!

    • John Sctoll says:

      @KJ, I am curious, when you go into the women only places, do you only use items that were invented by women, do you only eat food that was grown and picked by women, do you only wear clothes that were made by women only.

      Of course.

      Ungratefull much

    • Peter Houlihan says:

      Trouble is, male only spaces are illegal and discriminatory now. If you want the genders to be separated again, give them their golf clubs back.

      At least you’re honest: Your prejudiced sexism is based on assumption rather than any evidence. Sexists like Hugo like to dress it up with lies, damn lies and statistics. I like to have sexism stripped down to its bare stupidity and out in the open where I can keep an eye on it.

      I hope to hell you don’t live in a country where people can carry guns on the street, if only for the sake of the male tourist (sorry, foreign rapist in training) who gets shot because he made you feel unsafe by asking for directions.

    • Why are you posting here? If you hate men so much why some to an online forum for and about men?

    • QuantumInc says:

      Yes unfortunately KJ you are stuck with men. Lesbian separation was tried and failed, and it is easy to see why. That is why Hugo’s last paragraph calls on men to hold other men accountable when they do these things. If we’re going to change the culture we’re going to need everyone. By trying to run away (i.e. avoid men) you’re just making things worse for yourself and future generations, and obviously acting like men are horrible by default doesn’t help. Holding men accountable doesn’t mean assuming men are bad, but rather reacting when men behave badly, and making them correct their mistakes.

    • By living and consuming, paying taxes and voting, you are directly contributing and benefiting from the spoils of war. You’re nothing but a bigot and I truly hope you represent a minority and not the majority of people.

  12. PursuitAce says:

    So this is the top in offense for you? You need to get out more. LOL, I’m laughing with you (hopefully).

  13. I actually didn’t find this that offensive because it’s just so out there. Well, really, it’s not, but the way he portrays it as ALL MEN’S FAULT is. No one except his feminist groupies agrees with him.

    I find his posts on male “slackers” far more offensive because he’s contributing to the propagation of this misandrist myth which actually DOES have traction in mainstream society.

  14. “men should hold each other accountable”

    The lynch mob mentality is already alive and well, accused rapists are lynched by the media, sometimes vigilantes, their careers are finished and they go to court, if they are found guilty and go to prison then a much more overt form of punishment starts.

    To suggest that men should hold each other accountable is to ratchet up an already existing white knight lynch mob mentality.

  15. I will not be joining Hugos lynch mob.

    Especially given that a significant no of rape accusations are false.

    • “Especially given that a significant no of rape accusations are false.” Stop perpetuating dangerous urban myths. Significant numbers of accusations of no crimes are false. None.

  16. I find the balance of this piece off!

    If you are dealing with a child you reward good behavior and work to minimize bad or antisocial behavior. You Don’t assume all behavior is bad and require the child to prove that the majority of it’s behavior is good. If a parent did that, people would start gossiping and querying child abuse.

    To transfer that into and adult context – in the workplace , assuming that all males should be negatively judged can do nothing but create a hostile and unproductive workplace. Yet only males are judged in such matters – what would appear a highly justified and supported base view is not addressed and is discriminatory.

    If there is a social Paradigm that men are to be viewed as Guilty Until proven Innocent – then one would have to accept another Paradigm that all women have to be viewed as Misandrist until proven innocent!

    Taking extremes and Justifying them only leads to other extremes.

    “There’s more to being a “good guy” than not raping women. Good guys hold themselves and other men accountable, in public and in private. That’s a high standard to meet, particularly for the young. But it’s only by meeting that standard that men can help to change the culture. And until we do that, our feelings of guilt will not be entirely undeserved.”

    Now change the gender specific language and the underlying Paradigm – and see what you get!

    “There’s more to being a “Good Woman” than not assuming all men are a physical danger. Good Gals hold themselves and other Gals accountable, in public and in private. That’s a high standard to meet, particularly for the young. But it’s only by meeting that standard that Women can help to change the culture. And until we do that, our feelings of persecution will be entirely deserved.”

    It seems the issue is about making Paradigms and Paradigm Shifts Gender Neutral. As soon as that gender polarization gets thrown in it only entrenches the Faulty Paradigms and associated Memes, and blinds many to the faultiness of their own grasp of the whole issue.

    If some wish to claim the right to hold views – they also have responsibilities in making sure the views are correct and valid – else it just ends up being anti-social.

    • Well said, just like “slut shaming” is wrong, this “male shaming” Hugo espouses is bunk.

      • Kalebb

        It’s that issue with people dealing with a limited world view.

        Slut Shaming Is Wrong – Male Shaming is Wrong – so the Paradigm Shift is to stop Shaming and sex/gender gets removed.

        It also removes other distinctions – race, sexuality, disability and other distinctions which lead to their own unique forms of shaming.

        lazy negro – shaming – immoral queer – shaming – pitiable cripple – shaming!

        If some wish to deal with Patriarchy, It’s effects and it’s dismantling, they need to get with the program and stop using gender stereotypes for poor argument and short term debating points! Doing that is just shameful. P^)

  17. In any case, I’m not the type to hold suspicion when in public. The only people I’m suspicious of are the Mexican men in my neighborhood and it’s because every time I go out alone or with another female friend of mine, I’m ALWAYS getting catcalled by them, whether they’re driving past or I’m walking in an area heavily populated by them. So I believe I have every right to hold suspicion in this instance because this kind of behavior is ridiculous and I don’t understand why it’s all the time.

    But my dad tried socializing me to fear men I don’t know, but I always resisted that on bitter grounds. My brother got to do so much more than I could at the age of twelve simply because he was male, so I bitterly resisted everything my father told me about boys and men, about how boys are all sex fiends until they grow up. And yes, my dad literally told me all that stuff, so he himself perpetrated all the negative stereotypes the men on GMP try to dispel.

    In any case, no I myself don’t feel like I need to be suspicious of all men. Call me naive, call me a fool, but after work (and sometimes I’ll get out at 10 PM), I will walk all by myself to my car. Granted, I work at my university, but I’ve never felt the need to have campus security escort me to my car or have one of my male co-workers walk me. I haven’t been given a reason to live in that kind of fear, and I don’t want to live in that kind of fear. You are innocent until proven guilty in my eyes, and no man has ever given me a reason to feel otherwise.

  18. Peter Houlihan says:

    Placing the onus on men to change other men doesn’t cut it: only a minority of men rape, and If you’re into gender politics, chances are you’re not friends with them in the first place.

    This whole piece is stemming from the idea that what really causes rape is normal men joing about women. Have you read the psych profiles on men who rape? They’re anything but normal, and cracking sexist jokes may be a symptom, but it goes a hell of a lot deeper than that.

  19. natureartist says:

    I don’t look at porn, but I have read about issues surrounding its usage among men and boys in our society. It is my understanding that a great deal of it centers around violence against women, as well as other forms of degradation. Is this really the case? And if it is, why are men and boys so turned on by such sexual content that contains a violent and insulting message? We are talking about the culture of rape in male entertainment which translates into society, does it not? In the back of women’s minds, we know that this kind of thing exists. It is just another added concern that feeds into to the false perception that all men are sexually dangerous until proven otherwise. I know that it is unfair, and unfortunate that so many good men get swept up in that net. Just a note: I don’t see women as totally blameless either. We portray ourselves as sexual objects all the time, perversely we seem to think that is empowering. Objects don’t have power. Objects are items to be used by others. But the perception is what it is. It just doesn’t seem that society or men in general are doing anything to change that. I just heard on the news yesterday that the number of rapes and violent sex crimes against women has gone up significantly during the most recent study. It is directed mostly at women under 25 years of age. I don’t see this as any help for the good men out there.

    • Peter Houlihan says:

      No, thats not the case. The vast majority of porn out there is very bland and doesn’t contain much violence against women (or much of anything else except people having sex). Actual interest in sexual violence is relatively rare and, in my experience, fairly genderblind.

    • Peter Houlihan says:

      Seriously, try looking up some porn, its not the hotbed of woman hatred people seem to think it is. Its just people masturbating and having sex.

      • When the idea that all porn is about demeaning women comes up I always wonder how Gay Porn – Man On Man Action – relates to the idea.

        I get the idea that Porn can have an effect in sexualizing others – objectifying others – and can lead to some specific aberrant mind sets in a certain subset of people – but …….

        I then have to question Porn that is Specifically Lesbian – as in Female On Female action with no male presence.

        If people want to discuss Porn – I wish they would discuss it openly and Fully!

        But then again it’s a well trodden trope with it’s harvest of grapes turned into bottled grape juice so long ago that many have failed to check if there was any yeast present to cause fermentation.

        It seems there has been a great deal of fermentation outside of the bottle! P^)

        Cheers!

        • One of my friends was (and still is I guess) a big lesbian porn fan.

          One of the series titles he used to watch still puts a smile on my face.

          The title was called “No man’s land”.

  20. I’m not accountable for no one’s actions but my own, no one should be blames for the actions of someone else.
    If a man could stop harassing and assualting woman simply at the request of someone, it would’ve happen a long time ago.

    If you want to live with mistrust and fear of an entire group know that there are people who will not want to associate with you.
    If being fearful and cautious of entire group is ok in this situation, then it’s ok in very situation.

  21. Well Hugo, you’re being honest at least.

    With this article, you have so little faith and empathy in your own gender that you’d stop at nothing to throw them under the bus.

    So ALL men in rape culture, according to you, are guilty until proven innocent?

    Let me ask you a question:

    Suppose your pro-feminist leaning friends and colleagues were to accuse you of rape with no evidence whatsoever save their word? What if this was taken to court or you were arrested even when you state nothing happened?

    What if, for another example, a woman started harrassing and bullying you day in and day out. You search for support only to find that your colleagues and pro-feminist leaning friends don’t believe you, pleading for you to take it like a man and quit being so sexist against women?

    How about when you’re alone with a child, people start giving you dirty looks even though nothing harmful is happenning between the two of you?

    This and many more examples nonwithstanding, you think this would convince.

    In my opinion, nope. You’d still find a way to toot the horn of oppression against women, justify or turn it around to.

    Anyway, that’s all I have to say. Rather not waste my time anymore. Your mind’s made up.;

  22. Tom Matlack says:

    Hugo, really?

    Wow, I gottas say this one take the cake in terms of laying out there your view of manhood. So what we should assume is that all men are rapists unless proven otherwise? Should we also assume all black people are felons since they commit more crimes on average than white people?

    I just honestly don’t know how this line of thinking gets us anywhere. We are here to talk about how men can be GOOD. That is the topic of this website. So your answer is that to be good we need to accept being called rapists and hold our brothers responsible? I just don’t accept that. I view holding up the good actions of the many as far more important. Reading and telling stories of men overcoming adversity, doing the right thing when it is hard, learning how to love and be loved. To me that is the point. And you are missing it entirely here.

    • Tom – In Hugo’s defense I think he’s attempting to promote the strategy of Think Global Act Local.

      But – I do agree that making all men responsible for the actions of others does color the idea in the wrong way.

      Promotion of allies means equality – promoting that you can only be an Allie when you are not equal but guilty is not the way to go! It’s anti-equality and in fact down right none feminist!

    • Peter Houlihan says:

      Maith an focal.

    • I enjoy the concept of a clarion call for better men. But to be better men, we also have to treat men better.

      When we treat boys and men in monstrous fashion, is it any wonder we create monsters?

      Also, I would like to see a lot more on this sight about the incredible good men are already doing and have been doing for over 100 years (especially when you look at blue collar men who have built the suspension bridges and railways and highways going through or over majestic mountains).

      28,000 men died building the panama canal
      thousands of men died building the trans-atlantic railroad.
      117 men died building hoover dam
      These stories are replicated in bridges and dams and skyscrapers all across the usa.

      The good that men do in maintaining and improving our infrastructure and medicine and travel far far outweighs the bad that men do.

      It’s time for some acknowledgement of this.

      • There are 1 million volunteer firefighters across the USA (hint: volunteer means unpaid).
        They are 99% men.

        • John Sctoll says:

          About a year ago, I was watching TV about a program called “The week the women left”. It is a reality show about a small town where all the women go on a vacation and the men stay at home and do all the work, looking after kids, work, house cleaning etc.

          It was suppsed to be the usual tripe about how men would be lost without women, the funny part was for most of the men they actually were able to do the work, they struggled for sure, then again, I suspect their wives struggled the first time they did it to.

          Then something funny happened, the person doing the interview in an attempt to provide some balance asked the producer “Have you ever thought about doing one where all the men leave”. His response was absolutely priceless, “We tried to do that but couldn’t make it work because the town would literally fall apart without firefighters, police, sewage workers and garbage collectors”

          IOW, women can leave, and the men will pick up the slack, if men leave nothing will work.

          • It also reminds me of the 60’s counter culture with communes which set out to create a different way of being a social animal. There was supposedly equality and no hierarchy – everything done by consensus. They all collapsed and failed.

            Consensus can have a value – but when the consensus is to have an arts festival rather than harvest a field of ripe wheat, you can have fun at the festival and starve later.

            I have over the years heard the battle crys of we want to do it and learn new skills – and I’m all for learning. Learning in a class room is one thing – learning on the job quite another. I’m always fascinated by people who believe they can learn a whole skills set instantly!

            I have quite a lot of experience in putting together events and projects on a sliding scale from local to national. I recall one group who asked for input and whole plan was developed. Then it was decided that others could do better. It was interesting to watch – and at one point I was obliged to send a notice making it clear that I was not to be linked to any of the groups activity. Decisions were being made that were dangerous – and I mean potentially lethal. I was told to butt out and mind my own business. I did point this out and was told that I was just not accepting that They could do a better job. Erecting large tent and scaffolding systems under power-lines is not a question of doing a better job. It’s just dangerous.

            Disaster ensued – rather big blue sparks – oh and a nice warm camp fire where the Tent was supposed to be. This was then taken as a learning experience – which was no consolation for the people who had paid money to attend an event that got canceled – and no insurance either so no refunds. The owners of the destroyed equipment were not happy either – and individuals soon found out that an accidental camp fire has financial consequences for the people who signed on the dotted line.

            Gender roles may cause differences in many ways – but assuming you can take decades of expertise and replace it with supposed good intentions in an instant is just plain foolish – and even down right dangerous.

            I know many people who have employment which crosses gender battle lines – but they didn’t get their jobs through wishful thinking and frankly demanding they can do the job with Zero experience and Zero training. They worked hard and trained hard to gain the expertise needed for the job.

            In many ways it shows that men are better than women – men learn to be domesticated from birth so men have a wider skills base. If Privilege has been a issue for so long and talked about for decades, when will some seek equal privilege – and take the responsibilities that go with it? P^)

            It’s not just rape culture where all men are assumed to be guilty and wrong – and all too often excuses follow that are just gender warfare dressed up with a new lick of paint, on the same old bombs.

            • MorgainePendragon says:

              “They all collapsed and failed.”

              Uhm, no, they didn’t at all. There are hundreds of small intentional communities as well as whole regions and cultures of the world that exist in “equality [without] hierarchy – everything done by consensus.” See the Chiapas, Republic of Lakotah, et al and:

              http://www.ic.org/

              Businesses too (they’re called cooperatives), see Mondragon, as well as:

              http://www.naomiklein.org/articles/2009/05/cure-layoffs-fire-boss

              In fact, this has become a world-wide phenomenon and trend: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/15/opinion/worker-owners-of-america-unite.html

              So please, do a little research or even just read and learn to absorb information from MSM like the New York Times, Media[sic]Hound.

            • Hmmm – oh I do giggle!

              Media[sic]Hound? – and why do I use that Nome De Plume?

              Pity you didn’t ask – rather than making [sic]assumptions and [sic]presumptions! P^)

              I would point you to the work of early Counter Culture communes which fell under the ideal of man as a machine. They were mechanistic in view and even used the B Fuller Geodesic Dome as a symbol of their ideals.

              They fell under a common fallacy of the time that all systems including humans could be reduced to simple easily mapped processes and equations – consequently they assumed that all humans were equal, like cogs in a machine, and driven by the same intent.

              They found out very quickly that this was not true and exploded in social discord and failure.

              Maybe it’ my combined studies of Computer Science. Psychology and Social Media that provide cross disciplinary insights that some treat as bad faith?

              Intentional and co-operative are interesting ideals, which have been built upon the failures of earlier pioneers.

              If you are not familiar with group dynamics and their histories, maybe I could recommend you read some early examples and discussion on the matter, such as “Saddharma Puṇḍarīka Sūtra” – most commonly rendered in English as “The Lotus Sutra” – relating to the work, philosophy and teachings of Siddhārtha Gautama – Śākyamuni – AKA Buddha, sage of his clan.

              It is most interesting that the insights and ideals from so long ago still have validity today.

          • LOL, that sums up everything our feminist culture says about “equality”. Equality is a farce designed to pander to women’s petty sense of entitlement over men by pretending that men have that sense of entitlement over women.

            Perhaps they could have tried a program where the women tried to last seven whole minutes without men, instead of seven days. Sigh. I guess that would still endanger lives.

          • That all sounded too good to be true so I checked up and found some video of it. LOL.
            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lg5HWjgrMoo

            Still looking for that specific quote. Was it in the actual program or on some separate interview *about* the program? I found some interviews with the director…..

      • Here is the kind of stories and articles that should be detailed here at TGMP:
        ht tp://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2009/02/12/40_years_worth_of_thanks/

  23. RodKingsley says:

    Nah. I’m a grown man and I will never feel or act guilty for the actions of another man. However, I’m not a ‘nice’ or even ‘good’ guy. I’m a flawed human being just like everyone else. So…take it how you want it.

    • Ari Oglesby says:

      No one’s asking you to feel guilty for something someone else did. Just to be aware of the reasons women have to protect themselves.

  24. “As they told me, no woman can walk down the street and as she passes a man, know with certainty that he isn’t a threat. Given the high incidence of rape and assault and harassment and other forms of abuse, a woman would be a fool to leave herself continually vulnerable.”

    So for example if I myself being a black man is walking down the street and see a white man (like yourself) walking down the street. Due to the “history of white violence and violation” in America I should be on high alert because you are white? Or for that matter should a white person be on high alert and suspicious of me because of the “high crime rate” in the African American community? Should we both be afraid of the Arab or Muslim who selling his wares on the corner because he could be a “terrorist”? Should the Arab or Muslim expect that all of the non Arab or non Muslims want to kill him because of his identity. I would say no.

    Mr. Schwyzer I by advocating gender profiling you put yourself in very precarious company. Every group that has sought to justify their profiling of another group has always found reasons that justified their persecution of another group. Many of them though have in hind sight gravely regretted their actions. Mr. Schwyzer are you and your colleagues in the feminist community so sure of your convictions that you would subject an entire group to such actions?

    • Hear, hear, good sir! Thank you for your well phrased argument. Prejudging others is a kind of violence. A silent, and very destructive one. Sadly few people (of any colour, type, sex, gender, category, style, etc.) seem to be free of this toxic trait.

      • “So for example if I myself being a black man is walking down the street and see a white man (like yourself) walking down the street. Due to the “history of white violence and violation” in America I should be on high alert because you are white?”

        In certain parts of the deep south that would still not be unwise. And 60 years ago that would be true anytime you were in most all white neighborhoods. It has taken 50 years of America focusing on the racism problem for it to be the exception not the rule.

        Rape, sexual harassment and degrading of women by men needs to become a national issue before we will really start to deal with it as a society. Get a bunch of guys together and start talking about women and typically it does not take much to get them describing women as sexual objects. Nice tits, great ass, etc… Much like 60 years ago in large parts of the country if you got a bunch of whites together and started talking about blacks soon the n*gger word would come out.

    • Ari Oglesby says:

      Honestly, I think the take home message here is: people have to be careful. There’s a lot of crazy shit happening out there. No one can just trust random people they meet, that’s true for all races and gender identities. But remember, a lot of this depends on where you live. Currently, the high crime rate is associated with WHITE men in their 20’s. Sexual assault can come from any gender; it can come from anyone. However, women in this culture are still often raised to be certain things that make them more vulnerable to sexual assault than men, so they have to be extra careful. Muscular strength, “innocence”, being friendly to everyone… these are all issues that can determine one’s likelihood of being a victim. The author wrote about this because of his personal experience in a class about gender. That’s why he didn’t address race. The thing is, though, white people can’t say they know what it’s like to be black, and men can’t say they know what it’s like to be a woman and vice versa. We can’t keep lumping race and gender together. I thoroughly agree with you that profiling is wrong, but I think everyone has a right to protect themselves from assault from any attacker.

  25. DavidByron says:

    The actual answer is that feminists teach women to gender profile.

    Profiling is a disgusting bigoted attack on the minority group profiled and feminists teach women to do that towards men because feminists hate men. Feminists and “feminist ally” men then try to guilt trip men into believing that they among all minorities somehow deserve to be profiled. It’s all part of the hate campaign against men.

    • Ok, wait, HOLD up. Looking back on my ENTIRE LIFE, it is my grandfather, grandmother, father, mother, and brother that all taught me to gender profile. And they do not consider themselves feminist (in fact, they are from a more “macho” cultural understanding).
      Growing up, I was always told: “Be careful of strangers!” “Never trust ANYone!” (especially strange men, since “some bad men out there like to hurt little girls”).
      In a culture where girls constantly hear the message “Don’t *get* raped/kidnapped/touched/groped/etc” and the responsibility is always on the victim to prevent from being raped/assaulted, I have ALWAYS received that message from people OTHER than feminists.
      Gender profiling is simply ingrained in our culture, from the moment we’re able to understand, as kids, that we need to “look out” for strangers.

      • DavidByron says:

        Feminists didn’t invent gender profiling. Men were always oppressed in this manner. Feminists did however encourage it and by laying claim to the mantle of “equality” they made it impossible for society to realise that attacking men is wrong when people figured out attacking eg Mexicans or black people is wrong.

        I absolutely agree that other conservative groups beyond feminists have taught sexism against men, although those other groups have hurt both sexes “fairly’ let’s say, and for that matter many other groups. Society is getting better at this stuff, but it is not getting much better at recognising sexism against men because the feminist movement holds an iron grip on discussions about gender and it uniformly portrays men as evil.

        The other group that it’s still ok to treat like shit is foreigners in countries the US has decided to attack — men are not the ONLY group it’s OK to spit on. Having said that even profiling against Muslims or Arabs is something many people are aware of as an issue, but gender profiling against men is considered a good thing by most people.

        If an airport decided to stop and search every male Muslim there would be an outcry — but nobody would complain about profiling the men, only profiling by religion. Similarly you hear plenty about how many black people are in jail but the far greater bias against men is ignored.

        As the only acceptable voice on gender issues feminism is responsible for much of this sexism persisting, but you are right to say that men were always treated like shit dating back before feminism was even a word.

        • Okay, don’t know where you get all this backwards logic.

          Feminism doesn’t portray men as evil, it only brings to table what’s currently happening in society which include some of these messages that “men are evil” and how they’ve come about and how to address them. By the way, there’s no such thing as sexism towards men just as there’s no racism against whites and anyone who says so must be utterly self-involved and lacking social awareness. Maybe you’re looking for the word prejudice.

          • DavidByron says:

            Feminism does say all men are evil. You disagree? That’s fine. We can discuss it maybe.

            But then you go and say that, “there’s no such thing as sexism towards men”. That statement is itself an example of sexism towards men. If you take the view that men can never be hurt or treated badly no matter what, we are likely to disagree fundamentally on a lot.

            • Sexism, racism, are about power and privilege. But I suppose people use it to mean other things as well..
              I suggested another word, prejudice. Nobody, white, or male, can be invulnerable to hurt or bad treatment.

            • DavidByron says:

              You refuse to recognise your female power and privilege then?
              That is also sexism against men.

          • I also think you are angry at feminists for all the wrong reasons, because it brings up that SOME men are rapists and the reality of women, you automatically go on defense. Nowhere in this article did I read that *all* men should be guilty for other men’s actions. He is just saying in this culture and society women are already told to be cautious around men, society also backs this with statistics while also being lenient on men by telling women to be careful and responsible instead; bad behavior from men is not discouraged.

            • Mina, Hugo writes:

              “A man is entitled to a presumption of innocence from a jury in a courtroom, but not from his classmate with whom he tries to strike up what she ought to know is just an innocent conversation.”

              If men are not entitled to a presumption of innocence, that leaves the presumption of guilt. Like it or not, that is EXACTLY what Hugo has written. Please do not make pretend he has said something else.

            • A presumption of danger is not the same as the presumption that all men are dangerous. A presumption of danger is just reasonable self defence.

            • I want you to read what you wrote. That statement is tautological and nonsensical. If I have an “assumption of danger” for most African-Americans, Latinos, and Arabs, am I not a racist?

            • Justin Cascio says:

              DavidByron makes some valid points about the ways that men are profiled, and we need to be able to talk about that prejudice based on gender. If it’s not sexism, because someone (I don’t know who, just that I run into this, too, when I have conversations with my more politically active and radical friends) decided that the word only applies in some cases. What “female power” do you think Mina has refused to acknowledge, however?

            • Justin, is the point about “female power” a serious question?

              Anyone who has ever seen the fall out of a sexual assault accusation gets a great first-hand view of female power. Look up the Duke Lacrosse scandal and keep in mind that the false accuser went on to be a murderer, yet her word was good enough to nearly ruin the lives of several young men.

            • Justin Cascio says:

              RLH100, I understand the distinction that you are making. Kalebb, it is the difference between recognizing a dangerous situation and profiling someone as dangerous because he’s a man.

            • Justin, it is a null distinction. That same logic could be used (and IS used) to justify racial profiling: the police are just “investigating a dangerous situation” not immediately assuming someone is dangerous…

          • Jamie Parsons says:

            If you hate men, it’s sexism. If you hate white people, it’s racism. Don’t be ridiculous.

            Well yeah, if you want to be near the disgusting drinking and hook-up culture they have in college, well you should be cautious of men there. With the frat bro houses and culture, drinking as much alcohol and taking drugs plus with their sex-obsessed brains, you should be cautious. But that doesn’t mean you should hold all men as guilty.

            So if I walk down the street and smile at a woman, they should just assume that I’m a rapist? That I will just turn around and assault them if they smile back? But then on a night out women can just go up to drunk guys they don’t know and grind up against them right? How about women stop lumping us all in together, if they are worried then don’t talk to the drunks, or the drug users, or the dickheads, or the bros, or anyone else who is clearly disrespectful to you.

            Bad behaviour by men isn’t discouraged? Well sure, in colleges they probably encourage each other, but what parents tell their child to be disrespectful to women? None, really. If a friend or relative found out you were hurting a woman in any way, they discourage it. Bad behaviour is discouraged.

          • Michael Rowe says:

            “By the way, there’s no such thing as sexism towards men just as there’s no racism against whites and anyone who says so must be utterly self-involved and lacking social awareness. Maybe you’re looking for the word prejudice.”

            What a preposterous, arrogant, entirely ridiculous statement, quite apart from the fact that both sexism and racism ARE, in fact, prejudice.

        • “feminist movement holds an iron grip on discussions about gender and it uniformly portrays men as evil.”

          I don’t know where you’re getting your info on feminism from, but I suggest you check your facts before making any more wild assumptions.

          I took a feminism and arts courts in freshman year of university and at no time did we sit around and talk “sh*t about men and to suggest that that is all feminism is geared to do is so ignorant and disrespectful to all the men and women who created the movement and fought hard against the oppression of women in society. Now having said that, this particular course actually didn’t focus much on the oppression of women or women’s rights. Rather it focused on women’s ability to be creative and unique in a way that is different from men. It also celebrated women’s achievements. Why can’t women have an organization to talk about women and women’s issues without men feeling threatened?

          If anything this course taught me to open my eyes to men’s issues and male gender and how they are oppressed by societal expectations and interpretation of how men should look and behave etc. Before this course I woudln’t have given it a second thought, but because of it I realized that we all suffer from societal expectations.

          Feminism is about loving women, NOT hating men. It’s not all about you, sorry to burst your bubble.

    • Ari Oglesby says:

      I don’t think you understand what a feminist is. Perhaps you have met some who were actually crazy and not real feminists. You’re making a ton of really offensive generalizations.

      • You’re making a ton of really offensive excuses. A lot of these people were raised by feminsts and have seen feminism form the inside out, form the perspective of a defenseless child. They know exactly what they are talking about, a lot better than you do, and don’t presume to tell them any different. Their lived experiences are worth more respect than your cherished beliefs and hurt feelings.

  26. Did anyone else find it completely ironic that, just a few days ago, Hugo wrote an article telling men that it was their responsibility to mentor women (skimmed the comments and did not see that raised).

    In response to that post, many said that the fear of a baseless sexual harassment claim probably contributed to that. The legitimacy of those fears were minimized by some. But, now, Hugo comes around and says that men are guilty until proven innocent (something we knew anyway).

    So, even though you are guilty until proven innocent, you have an obligation to mentor your accuser.

    I know. The mind boggles.

    -Jut

  27. “Men who grumble about being “guilty until proven innocent” are demanding to be seen as individuals, separate from their perceived sex and the history that goes with it. That’s a tempting but unreasonable demand to make.”

    I thought feminism was about the reasonable demand for women to be seen as individuals separate from their perceived sex and the history that goes with it? I don’t find that demand unreasonable for women and I’ll blithely continue to demand that people see me as an individual regardless of whether they believe I have a penis or not.

    I’m perfectly OK with being judged for MY own history of behaviour and I would find it unreasonable that every Tom, Dick and Harry gets tarred with my sins just because they share my perceived gender.

    • you know the ironic thing? One of the things on that “male privilege checklist” that gets tossed about occasionally is “I won’t be judged negatively by the actions of others of my gender”

  28. After reading the post explaining MRAs, I have to say that some of the replies here are hilarious…even if they should not be.

    Anyway, one thing I will say is that despite my being unable to go anywhere alone in public without risking having some man catcall me or give me looks solely designed to remnid me that my most obvious worth to them is sexual, I still feel that I can smile back at some men who give me friendly smiles. There is an obvious difference between a friendly smile and one that is leering and objectifying. No, I’m not going to become fast friends with them or anything, but simple politeness in a well-populated area with someone who isn’t giving out creep-vibes is fine. That being said, I am constantly on the defense and do not judge anyone innnocent or guilty at first–I judge you a potential danger, and I have to do so for my own protection.

    The truth of the matter is that men on average are stronger than women. I could take an average woman in a fight if I needed to. I could likely not do the same with a man. I have a biological right to be wary of situations that could place me in harm. If you think that this is an aspect of feminism, then you are sorely deluded. Long before the feminist movement women were not even allowed to be alone with men. Why do you think this was? It is a simple understanding of reality and biology. No, I don’t think that the majority of men are rapists or bad people. i do not believe that the majority would cause me harm given the chance. But I also am not obligated to take stupid risks, no matter how small the chance is that it could go badly. In my eyes, the consequences are simply not worth it, and no one has the right to tell me that I should trust someone solely because it hurts their feelings for me not to. Sympahty is often prayed on by those who do have ill intentions (Ted Bundy, anyone?) If men would like to be wary in a similar fashion, I welcome them to it.. It is their right as well.

    • DavidByron says:

      You are defending your gender profiling of men — your sexism and your female privilege. The same argument is used by racists and so on to justify racial profiling.

    • “give me looks solely designed to remnid me that my most obvious worth to them is sexual.”

      No man can divine what degree you hold, what political opinions you hold dear and what skills you possess by merely looking you on the street. Your looks are all they have to go by. Why is that so surprising?

    • Jamie Parsons says:

      Ok, so if you want someone to trust you, you’re Ted Bundy. Nice generalisation. Ted Bundy was a man, so I shouldn’t trust you.

    • Miss V:
      Where feminists are creating demonstrable harm to men is when they say things like:
      “All men have a role to play in stopping rape.”

      Or
      “All men have to be vigilant against rape culture”

      It’s like feminists have this upside down funhouse mirror view that men nod and say “women are to be respected yup yup” then go join there bands of bros and laugh at jokes about sex assaults on women.

      As you mention your safety, whenever a man gives safety tips to women about keeping themselves safe, many feminists will retort “why is her safety her issue? Why don’t we tell men to NOT RAPE!!!!???”
      If I told somebody not to run out of gas in X neighborhood, would anybody say “it’s their responsibility to NOT CARJACK!”

      Feminists seem to initiate a CONCERTED drive to conflate dysfunctional criminal activity (rape) with an excess of masculinity. There statements on rape are so Effing bizarre, and reveal a deep contempt of men and male sexuality it’s not even funny.

      I don’t know how prevalent you are on these feminist forums but you don’t have to travel far to find them.

      There are even some articles like that on this web-page.

      The simple fact is that no “awareness campaign on colleges or anywhere else will EVER reduce rape”. The reasons is that these awareness campaigns are about instilling guilt.

      But those who rape women are typically dysfunctional or cruel men who not only rape, but commit other crimes as well against both women and men.

      It’s time to stop conflating rape with masculinity. Rape has everything to do with dysfunctionality and nothing to do with masculinity.

  29. DavidByron says:

    Good piece. Reads like a parody of sexist asshole man-hating feminism.

    This sort of thing is what is killing the feminist movement so I applaud it. We need more openness by feminists instead of all those fakers pretending they don’t hate men.

  30. I don’t think anyone is advocating profiling of any sort.

    Women are physically build of much slighter frame than majority of men. That is the reason they are easy targets of rape and violence. The same argument can be made for children as well. Some men rape, because they can. Do you ever hear of obese people getting raped??? Bullies bully those who look weaker than themselves…these are just the facts and nature of how criminals operate. If women had handguns and knew how to use them – the power then shifts from man to woman.

    A man stalking another man would even out the playing field somewhat…that’s why you’ll never see in a boxing ring, a man and woman fighting. Even fighting between men, in boxing, they fight by weights…lightweight and heavyweight.

  31. The Bad Man says:

    Clearly this is a feminist website, just be honest about it. This series on Male Guilt is all about blaming men, just like usual at this site.

    • Justin Cascio says:

      There seems to be plenty of representation both by people who call themselves feminists and by people who declaim feminists and feminism. The original emphasis, it seems to me, is on men (whether we’re feminists or not) talking about our own experiences, and helping one another along, on the presumption that being good men means always learning and growing. Some of us good men have learned some lessons from feminism that are broadly applicable to all of humanity and worth passing along. It doesn’t mean, and never has meant, that all people who call themselves feminists agree on everything. We don’t even all agree on a definition of “feminist” any more than we have on what a “good man” is. The important thing is to have the conversations.

  32. Uncle Woofie says:

    I know at first this will sound like a trivialization, but hear me out.

    One of the “alternate” names for the Batman character is “The Dark Knight”. If you want to watch the vast majority of men turn into a “Dark Knight,” ask them about how they feel about violence against women, and PARTICULARLY rape. This attitude even extends to women who are victims of crude male behavior such as MissV mentioned. The “presumed guilty” tendencies (I refuse to call it “rape culture”, that term is a simplification of a very complex issue, this entire comments section is testimony to that) seem to be stemming for the most part over necessary female concerns in public as well as other situations. Granted, this can be taken to paranoid extremes, but instead of getting tore outta my frame over this, I will choose to employ some rather simple tactics that make it obvious to any lone female I encounter that I’m not a threat.

    I leave plenty of “personal space” between myself and any woman alone that I speak to, especially if conditions such as an empty parking garage, or stranded by herself on a lonely road are involved. I follow these and a few other guidelines, until I determine by her speech and body language she has decided that I’m not a threat. I do this out of understanding her caution, not the fear of a face full of pepper spray or any personal resentment over “rape culture” indoctrination. I have offered a ride to stranded women that included my spoken understanding that in these circumstances, if she feels more comfortable riding in the back seat while I’m driving, I would certainly understand. I consider none of these concerns/fears a woman would have a “presumption of male guilt”. I also do not believe the precautions a woman feels she must take in vulnerable situations is an automatic condemnation of ever male onna goddam PLANET.

    I even employ a pleasant “courtly” attitude & speech pattern as I offer that ride in the back seat, explaining my understanding of what she may be concerned about under these circumstances. My favorite writer, Robert A. Heinlein (known as the “Dean” of science-fiction) declared through many of his male characters in many of his books that courtesy and politeness in human society was a sign of strength, not weakness.

    I submit to you all that what I have mentioned should be included in Mr. Heinlein’s assessment of male courtesy & polite behavior. Good men should be willing to understand the real fears that women can have that drive this issue, and surmount its problems and the male resentment Mr. Schwyzer mentioned with a sense of compassion, style (“courtly” attitude, remember?), courtesy…and most of all strength.

  33. *facepalm

    “As they told me, no woman can walk down the street and as she passes a man, know with certainty that he isn’t a threat.”

    Wow just wow. Okay for starters nothing can be said with 100% certainty. If you are really looking for that much certainty you won’t find it anywhere in this world and to expect that something in the future might give women 100% certainty of being able to walk down the street without being harassed/assaulted/raped is just a fantasy conjured up in your head (if that is what you think is possible). 100% certainty DOES NOT EXIST. Reasonable certainty does exist.

    “Given the high incidence of rape and assault and harassment and other forms of abuse, a woman would be a fool to leave herself continually vulnerable. The old adage “Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me” applies”

    Again like the above with the word certainty, here you seem to use the word vulnerable to mean completely vulnerable. It would be idiotic to expect even a man to walk down any street anywhere while leaving themselves completely vulnerable. No rational person would suggest that others do so. However, what defense, if any, does having a mindset of guilty until proven innocent lend to those who think they may be victimized?

    “When a simple smile is so frequently misunderstood and construed as a sexual invitation, women generally do have to operate on the assumption that men are guilty until proven innocent.”

    No no no no no they frickin don’t. They may choose to but just like I may choose to believe that the moon is made of green cheese without any evidence for it so people can pick whatever irrational belief they wish to hold. If most men won’t and haven’t committed violent acts against women then how rational is it to presume that any one man is likely a monster?

    “Men who grumble about being “guilty until proven innocent” are demanding to be seen as individuals, separate from their perceived sex and the history that goes with it. That’s a tempting but unreasonable demand to make.”

    “African Americans who grumble about being “guilty until proven innocent” are demanding to be seen as individuals, separate from their percieved race and the history that goes with it. That’s a tempting but unreasonable demand to make.” Sounds racist right? That’s because it is and just like how the above tries to legitimize painting all men with a broad brush so racists use the exact same sort of arguments in order to “other” an outgroup.

    “While “innocent until proven guilty” is an excellent guideline for courtroom proceedings, it doesn’t translate nearly as effectively into public life and relations between the sexes. When men gripe that women are suspicious of their intentions merely because they are men, they are forcing women into the role of the district attorney, the one shouldered with the burden of proving guilt. In a society where women, rather than men, are overwhelmingly the victims of harassment and assault, those who have suffered most are the ones being asked to lay aside their prior experience and knowledge and
    approach each new male in their lives with a blank slate, free from judgment.”

    Fractally wrong. Even outside the courtroom this is an example of Shifting the Burden of Proof. When you make a claim X, even in your head, it is still yours to prove and isn’t up to anyone else to prove you wrong. Sorry there is no way to square this circle no matter how bad you “feel” you need to or would desire to do so.

    “But our anger is rightly directed not at women who have been the victims (individually and collectively) of predatory males, but at those men who have “poisoned the well” for everyone else.”

    Right and wrong bucko. You are correct that our anger should be directed at those men who do commit such vile acts. However, the poisoning the well that is going is by women who take a minority of men and then blame men in general for that minority’s wrondoings.

    “In our culture, where rape and harassment and abuse are so common, men have lost the right (if it ever existed) to insist that women should be able to differentiate (in a matter of seconds) between the harmless and the threatening. A man is entitled to a presumption of innocence from a jury in a courtroom, but not from his classmate with whom he tries to strike up what she ought to know is just an innocent conversation.”

    Is it ever okay to broad brush any group for whatever a small percentage of that group do? If your answer is anything other than ‘no’ then you are, pardon my french, a dick and immoral in the highest degree.

    “Holding other men accountable”

    Okay our system isn’t perfect but if you can think of a better system and you can prove it then elighten the rest of us with more than vague allusions to what a society would look like. Criminals are prosecuted everyday in this country for the wrongdoings that they commit. Some get away yes, and I’m all for a way of finding a way to bring those to justice, but not at the expense of an innocent person.

    ” challenging sexist and objectifying language and behavior in yourself and in other males (whether or not women are around) is the single most effective thing men can do to change the culture of “guilty until proven innocent.”

    How about challenging overgeneralizations for a start? I mean I thought that’s what many movements were about. Boy was I wrong. What is objectifying language? That phrase is rather vague.

    ” Rather than demand that women “smile more” ”

    Uh…er…what? Who makes this demand? That’s not a rational demand to make of anyone. If you don’t want to smile…THEN DON’T!

    “men need to channel their frustration at being “pre-judged” into a commitment to end what it is that causes women’s suspicion in the first place.”

    Agreed, challenging prejudicial and irrational thinking everywhere and anywhere it happens is of the utmost importance.

    “Silence is, in practical terms, tacit consent and approval.”

    If a man says something sexist in India and I never hear it and it is never reported in the news am I still responsible for challenging it? Would my silence on the matter make me an accomplice to his crime? I can see some of your point here and I would agree that sometimes saying nothing isn’t moral but it’s a bit more complicated than that.

    “There’s more to being a “good guy” than not raping women.”

    Um….okay….agreed.

    “Good guys hold themselves and other men accountable, in public and in private. That’s a high standard to meet, particularly for the young. But it’s only by meeting that standard that men can help to change the culture. And until we do that, our feelings of guilt will not be entirely undeserved.”

    Agreed if someone does something that I find morally reprhensible, like maligning half of humanity without any rational justification to do so, then yes standing up to that person is the morally correct thing to do. But I do not think that the way to solve the problem of innocent until proven guilty is to just allow it to happen and to allow those feelings of resentment to fester inside falsley accused men until those falsely accused men take it out on their brothers. By the way, how do you know they won’t take that resentment out on their sisters? No, I’m sorry the flaw is in human thinking and that’s what needs to be addressed. Rape, murder, prejudice, bias will exist so long as humans exist. I’m sorry there is no
    and never will be a perfect society. Does that mean we should just throw up our hands and give up? No because we can make this world better even if just by a little bit. But we won’t make it any better if we try to justify maligning a whole half of humanity simply because someone somewhere wronged a person of the opposite sex who then in turn took it upon themselves to make a snap judgement based upon a single data point. We used to call that prejudice. I and no man have absolutely nothing to prove to you or any woman and just like I wouldn’t presume some random woman is a bad person, I’d like to receive a bit of the same common courtesy in return.

  34. Why does anyone take hugo seriously?

    He cites statistics as a way to win argument. His opponents use the same statistics and show that his view is wrong. He doesn’t change his view or explain himself.

    At that point it is clear he isn’t arguing in good faith. His views are completely discredited. He doesn’t add anything to any serious discussion. He is the ultimate white knight his only motivation seems to be to prove how macho he is by trying to argue how terrible all other men are. He is making feminists look bad. Seriously he is making feminism look like bigotry.

  35. Survey shows women are just as smart as men. Feminists cheer
    Survey shows women are just as violent as men. Feminists booo
    Feminism for me used to mean men and women are equals. Why is it such a surprise that women are violent like men? When did clinging to the idea of women being innocent like mother mary become feminism?

    • Hit the nail on the head. Feminism in America is a useless, in some ways harmful movement. It’s overstayed its welcome. It was useful when women weren’t equal, but for all inclusive purposes, they are more than equal (60% of undergrads are women; women do better in school). Now hardcore feminists want women to be superior, and I say no. It’s high time feminist organizations forget about America and the rest of the first world, and focus on places where women aren’t equal, i.e. the entire Middle East.

  36. Hugo: By that rationale I should be wary of every Muslim person I see. After all, they’re the terrorists right? And as Tom Matlack repeatedly points out, the prisoners in jail and people who commit crimes are overwhelmingly black. Should I be wary of every black person I pass at night?

    You continue to prejudge an entire gender unfairly. Not only that, you sound a clarion call for men to change (and yes, some change is definitely needed), but say nothing of improvements that must be made by women. You have never, EVER blamed women for anything or admitted they have work to do as well. It’s all about what men are doing wrong. And crazy enough, you’re not even going after the men who are making it worse for everyone. You’re actually saying the men who are conducting themselves appropriately should feel guilty for the sins of other men.

    Not only is it laughable, it’s flat-out confusing.

    I will not feel guilty for the actions of others. I will condemn those actions I find objectionable, sure. I’m not out to condone unacceptable behavior. But there is no reason I should feel guilty about white people hundreds of years ago owning slaves, and there is no reason I should feel guilty about the actions of other men who have wronged women. I’m angry at those men, but I do not bear their burden of guilt. Nor should I.

  37. I guess you could say this is just advancing the theory of “original sin” to its ultimate conclusion – but excluding women, of course.

    The problem here is not with feminism, men, women, ideology, racism, or anything that complex. The problem here is with a fine author who simply finds it necessary to apologize for what he is in order to ingratiate himself with those he admires. “Look at me – I get it!”

    No Hugo – you don’t. And you may never.

  38. Men are more likely to be victims of violent crime than women. Feminists say this doesn’t matter since, it is other men committing the violence. I don’t see too many people accepting this kind of logic to minimize crimes against African Americans on the basis that they are mostly intra-racial. This line of thought also leaves out the fact that women often don’t attack men directly but manipulate other men into doing men harm (false accusations are a prime example of this).
    Aside from who’s to blame, the fact is men generally do face a higher level of danger. So men should feel less safe walking alone at night, for example, than women do, or women should feel safer than men do. It is possible that men have a false sense of safety, but even more so women have an exaggerated sense of being threatened. This is due to panic inducing demagoguery. Not all of it is feminist based, but mainstream feminism certainly has taken this torch and run with it. The whole theory of “rape culture” is eerily similar to White Supremacist notions of “The Savage Negro”. Prominent feminists and their allies (including some religious and “law and order” conservatives) now use the (some what toned down, but still very similar) rhetoric that got men of a certain race lynched in the Jim Crow Era, against men in general.

  39. There is a lot of discussion here about women’s fearfulness of men and whether that attitude is sexist or offensive towards men. However, it’s not clear to me that the way women FEEL has any actual impact on men. Since we are mainly talking about women’s private thoughts and feelings, which they may never even express openly, I’m curious to find out what men imagine the world would be like if women DIDN’T have those fears. I.e., would it change anything in the daily lives of men and if so, how? Would it make your life better or different if random female strangers didn’t fear you? Or would you basically just go on living your life the way you do now? Because my assumption is that how I privately feel about random men who cross my path has little, if any, effect on them. It only has an impact on me. It may limit my activities, it doesn’t limit men from doing whatever they want. Any thoughts on this?

    • Justin Cascio says:

      My feeling on this is, if you grow up with the media and strangers on the street all telling you that you are a dangerous person, prone to violence, that it is going to have an effect. Every day, I pass women who studiously avoid my eye, and who I ignore back out of the kind of courtesy I learned on the subway in NYC, where simply ignoring one another is the only privacy neighbors can give one another. Here in my small college town, that young women (it’s mostly young women I get this from) still feel so harassed and intimidated that they need that space from me, makes me sad. So one way my life would change would be the lack of those small moments of sadness, when I realize that this neighbor passing me feels afraid, and probably does a lot, since she’s scared of me, and I’m harmless.

      I’m healthy, lucky, and well-adjusted, but I think there are men who internalize that image. Like other commenters, I don’t want to feel guilty. Besides being respectful, even courtly–a tough balancing act with egalitarianism–is every man supposed to speak at the next Slutwalk in order to assuage our collective guilt? Schwyzer asking us to redirect any anger at the poor jogger toward the patriarchy, instead, seems quixotic. How are we supposed to change the rape culture, walking down the street?

      • Well-if men speak at slutwalk, isn’t that “mansplainin'”?

        You don’t have to change “rape culture,” just don’t be a rapist.

        I don’t have to change “rape culture,” just not be a rapist.

        I will not accept guilt for another male’s crime.

        I care not about a movement that says in a condescending tone “what about teh menz.”

        I care not about a nation that would gladly send me to die for oil…

        The Selective Service IS MISANDRY….

        Learn that word, they don’t want you to know it because they hope you can’t define something you don’t know.

      • I know it is hurtful to be judged negatively based on nothing but your gender. Unfortunately, many young women have learned that when they smile and make eye contact with strange men, it sometimes leads to harassment — a lewd comment or worse, even from men who look “normal.” So they avoid eye contact (just as men in big cities learn to avoid eye contact with young men who look threatening in case it’s taken as a challenge). Even if something like that only happens a couple of times, it can be so upsetting that you may never forget it (I clearly remember several incidents that occurred when I was in my 20’s and living in San Francisco). Then there are the fears of being physically attacked or raped which come from years of watching the news, hearing about horrible experiences of other women, and getting stern warnings from parents, friends, teachers, and boyfriends. I guess you just have to keep in mind that if that pretty young woman you are looking at appears scared and uncomfortable, it is not personal. They are not holding YOU responsible for bad actions of other men. They are simply looking out for their own safety; they don’t know you and they have no information about you to go on.

        Men may internalize the image of a predator,but women are forced to internalize the image of a victim, which can be very scary and disempowering. I just wonder how it is possible to change this given that violence exists in our society and women (and men!) do really need to be cautious about their personal safety or risk pretty terrible consequences.

        • Meanwhile young men learn that anywhere, at any time, for any reason – including merely upsetting some random female – they can easily get the crap kicked out of them at the drop of a hat.

          Personally I learned at age eight that my country could do whatever it liked with me up to the point of vaporisation – a fate to which my sisters could NOT be condemned. At the same time because I’m male I’m obliged to defend and protect women.

          By the way, when the woman I once turned down returned shortly after to grab my genitals to “see if there was anything there” THAT is sexual harassment. It certainly wasn’t the big joke everybody in that venue thought so hilarious.

  40. Henry Vandenburgh says:

    As usual, I don’t agree with Hugo. I like the idea of self-defense training for anyone.

  41. Why do good men have to pay for other men’s bad behavior? Hugo Schwyzer explains the answer he learned in his first Women’s Studies class.

    I don’t even care what Hugo’s rationalization is. The notion that one person pays for another’s sins, because they share the same genitalia, despite having never met or having anything else in common is pure evil. I don’t care what rationalizations Hugo comes up with. Men are individuals. Nuff said.

    • right on!

      He must have some weird view of original sin or something….

      I think he has some kind of guilt complex for his transgressions and expects us to pick up the tab….

      nope, not gonna do it….

  42. This is one of the most ridiculous things I have ever read.

    If I didn’t know any better, I would think Hugo is trying to score points with his feminist girl-pals. A little high five and “good job” to keep his apparently fragile self-esteem up.

    Is rape really all that common? Hugo didn’t use any stats, but I’m assuming that he is coming from the “1 in 4” benchmark, which has been demolished over and over, and over and over and over again.
    http://falserapesociety.blogspot.com/2011/02/one-in-four-lie-demolished-once-and-for.html

    If the implications of inflated rape statistics weren’t so serious, it would be laughable the way people like Hugo adhere to this gigantic fallacy. Instead, they are one more tool for feminists to bludgeon innocent men into submission.

    There is about zero value for men in this article. The amount of bad faith inherent in what Hugo has written says it all. Good Men do not allow themselves to be beaten over the head with false rape statistics, and Good Men do not tell other men they are rapists until proven otherwise.

  43. (r)Evoluzione says:

    Innocent until proven guilty. That’s the rule of law, that’s what the constitution says, these are our God-given, nature-granted, constitutionally enumerated human rights. Thus we should presume to conduct our lives giving all people the benefit of the doubt, until proven otherwise.

    To assume all people are good until proven otherwise is the prudent course of social action, because if not, if we start by presuming all men are rapists, soon we will presume that all people are ax-murdering pedophiles until proven innocent. What a way to foster social harmony and good relationships!

    So if women are going to presume that all men are guilty, men ought to do the same for women. Fair’s fair. Let’s start by assuming that all women are radical feminists who cut off men’s penises. Thus don’t judge me if I carefully vet the women I let into my life based on the absence of radfem propaganda in their lives.

  44. Hugo and Miranda, Thanks you so much! I think you are all to something Great! The machete imagery is right on! It just doesn’t go quite far enough. So I thought about this variation, as in nature, when a spider or mantis sees a beautiful female of the species, then proceeds to die as a result of approaching her, we should all like-wise view all women as black-widows, and praying mantis! Because, even though it’s only about 60% of women out there who behave this way, we really don’t wanna take the chance!

  45. The patriarchy hurts us all, male, female, and lgbtq. Divided we fall. Some have been corrupted and enslaved by the power granted by having a cock. Others have been radicalized by the victimizations they have or are at a high statistical likelihood of sustaining for being fuckable. It’s all about power and name calling. feminism is a mysnomer, it’s actually just one front of a global war for egalitarianism, the native state of humankind.

    • anonymouswoman says:

      I’ve come to prefer the term kyriarchy over patriarchy. It allows us to consciously acknowledge intersectionality, and escape placing blame for the propagation of the system entirely at the feet of men (women who have adopted the dominant message do indeed teach it to their own children, and reinforce stumbling blocks to progress among their peers).

    • “The patriarchy hurts us all, male, female, and lgbtq. Divided we fall.”

      Well said!

  46. kat

    “The patriarchy hurts us all, male, female, and lgbtq. Divided we fall”

    I am sad to say it, but you’ve been duped. The feminist movement is a construction of the american communist movement. Selling victim-ology where it doesn’t exist as a pretense to bring down capitalism, especially in america. Women in america are more free, more successful, have more choices than anywhere else in the world. But feminism, like communism has one solitary pernicious goal, to bring down the most fair, just, and accepting society that ever existed. Marxist philosophy pits victim classes against each other to bring the system down. Unfortunately, all Marxist experiments have demonstrated brutal violence leading to bloody puges that kill in the dozens of millions. Moreover, the quality of life and lack of freedom leads to dismal squalid conditions. Women in america have been attending college for over 100 years, and writing under there own names for more than 150yrs. Women worked on farms, and Merchant shops since the mid 1700s. and when the industrial revolution arrived women, (and children) were working in factories, a situation that has yet to disappear. Simply put, the “patriarchy,” is a paper tiger, a straw man to ruin the cooperative and mutually beneficial relationship between men and women known as marriage and also the extended family. Back when life was harder and survival less of a guarantee, it was easier to see the value of role specialization, because without it, everyone in the family would starve. Also, the statistics the women’s movement uses to support it are fraudulent, worse then climategate.

    • Michael Rowe says:

      Congratulations, Rob. You just managed to make the most delusional, hysterical, specious, and uneducated comment on this entire thread. Which is saying something,

    • I don’t know where you’re getting your info on feminism from, but I suggest you check your facts before making any more wild assumptions.

      I took a feminism and arts courts in freshman year of university and at no time did we sit around and talk “sh*t about men and to suggest that that is all feminism is geared to do is so ignorant and disrespectful to all the men and women who created the movement and fought hard against the oppression of women in society. Now having said that, this particular course actually didn’t focus much on the oppression of women or women’s rights. Rather it focused on women’s ability to be creative and unique in a way that is different from men. It also celebrated women’s achievements. Why can’t women have an organization to talk about women and women’s issues without men feeling threatened?

      If anything this course taught me to open my eyes to men’s issues and male gender and how they are oppressed by societal expectations and interpretation of how men should look and behave etc. Before this course I woudln’t have given it a second thought, but because of it I realized that we all suffer from societal expectations.

      Feminism is about loving women, NOT hating men. It’s not all about you and it certainly has nothing to do with communism :s sorry to burst your crazy-theory-bubble.

  47. “Michael Rowe”

    Really Michael? do tell

    • Michael Rowe says:

      You’re an idiot, Rob. It’s men like you, and moronic babbling–comparing feminism to “communism” and “climategate” and “victim-ology”–that make it impossible for normal men to have a critical discussion about any possible negative fallout effects from carved-in-stone feminist truisms without looking like bloviating MRA lunatics.

      • “. . . carved-in-stone feminist truisms. . .”

        How are you defining “carved-in-stone feminist truisms?” Can you cite an example?

        Also, for future reference, note that generally only people without rational arguments need to stoop to name-calling. Otherwise, they would simply shut their opponent down with fact and logic.

        Even if you think your opponent fits the definition of those names, you place yourself beneath that level by name-calling.

        • Though, Eric, sometimes when a wing-nut conspiracy-theory spouting idiot jumps into a discussion to derail it, you just have to call a spade a spade.

          • No doubt but name-calling only makes the name caller appear small and suggests that they have no intelligent argument.

      • PursuitAce says:

        How come you can call someone an idiot, but you can’t say you like this website without getting moderated?
        Let me try. Lela, Rob, Eric M.(not Eric), and Michael you’re all idiots. Strangely I don’t feel any better.

  48. In your eyes if prejudging the male gender is ok, then prejudging an entire race or age group is ok too.

  49. less than 1% of american men commit rapes or sexual

    assault, fbi!

    153,000,000 men in America
    191,670 number of reported rapes and sexual

    assaults (fbi)

    let me say that again. less than 1% of american men

    commit rapes or sexual assault, fbi! the precise

    number is 00.00125!

    rape culture is a joke!

  50. Michael, “You’re an idiot, Rob”

    not an idiot, 142iq, 1500SAT on the old test. 4.4GPA through College, Early admission to UC (berkley) Harvy Mudd, US Naval Academy, UM Rolla, etc. Started my own business in O1, 18 patent applications pending. Not an idiot. the statistics are clear, look them up for yourself if you wish.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_United_States

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_statistics

    less than 1% of american men commit rapes or sexual

    assault, fbi!

    153,000,000 men in America
    191,670 number of reported rapes and sexual

    assaults (fbi)

    let me say that again. less than 1% of american men

    commit rapes or sexual assault, fbi! the precise

    number is 00.00125!

    rape culture is a joke!

    • Rob, I hate to point this out to someone who is “not an idiot” but if you look at the eighth sentence in the wikipedia article on rape statistics that you just linked, you’ll notice this quote “Estimates from research suggest that between 75 and 95 per cent of rape crimes are never reported to the police.”

      And if you follow the news at all you will have noted it all over the place that the FBI has just this week taken steps to revamp its antiquated and problematic definition of “rape” because it causes so many problems in gathering accurate statistics in this area of crime reporting.

      And further, if you follow the news at all, you will have noted that the CDC has just issued a groundbreaking report on sexual violence by intimate partners. Let me quote from the press release, “On average, 24 people per minute are victims of rape, physical violence, or stalking by an intimate partner in the United States, according to findings released today by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Over the course of a year, that equals more than 12 million women and men. Those numbers only tell part of the story – more than 1 million women REPORTED being raped in a year and over 6 million women and men were victims of stalking in a year, the report says.” [emphasis mine]

    • Ron – you are confusing RATES with the sum that, over time, commit rape. For instance: I travel 60 miles per hour. Does this mean I have only ever traveled sixty miles? NO! It means EACH HOUR I travel sixty miles. Let us assume each year the number who rape and the number that are raped are distinct. Then, over a 20 year period, the supposed number of men who are rapists jumps to 2.5%. That may not sound like a big number, but it means more than 1 in 50 men a woman meets may have raped someone. I’m not saying this is the case. Studies show most rapes occur by SERIAL rapists – that is they rape, and rape, and rape.

      However, you also missed that 1 in 6 women have been the victim of attempted or completed rape. This correlates to 16.6% of women. Lets say for a moment that only one third are the victims of completed rape. That drops it down to little more than 5% of women – but thats one in 20! Thats a LOT of women who end up getting raped. Worse, it doesn’t match up with the contention that 2.5% of men or less are rapists. Those serial rapists must REALLY be at it!

      In my own experience, 3 out of 8 women I had a personal conversation with had been raped or experienced sexual assault. None had reported to any agency (one was too young to know how to appropriately react when it occurred to her). The threat for women is real, not imagined.

      Whats more, rape is one of the strangest crimes – women are expected to say ‘no’ in order for rape to count. When we are robbed, is it actually ‘giving’ someone money if we don’t fight back? If we are drunk when we are robbed, is the robber mitigated of responsibility? If you sometimes loan money to a friend, is he allowed to go into your wallet and take some money without getting express permission? No!

      • Mostly123 says:

        “You are confusing RATES with the sum that, over time, commit rape. For instance: I travel 60 miles per hour. Does this mean I have only ever traveled sixty miles? NO! It means EACH HOUR I travel sixty miles…”

        I never like wading into debates about statistics – no matter how perfect or imperfect the statistics, everyone has had different personal experiences- so whatever side of the statistics they’re on, it’s going to contradict someone else’s experiences- they’re not being disingenuous, it’s just that the static doesn’t ring true to them – but that doesn’t make a statistic invalid; or, for that matter, infallible.

        Gwen, what I did want to comment on was how pertinent your point was- to think about rape statistics in terms of a collective sum rather than as rate, a percentage, or a ratio. I think this resonates with most people in a far deeper and profounder way than you may realize: Simply thinking about the sum total of people who have been raped.    
        One is too many: everyone understands that and believes that. ‘Zero’ is something that is readily quantifiable and relatable. Presenting the statistics as a collective sum, in relation to ‘zero’ – the number that everyone wants – is (almost counterintuitively) more humanizing. After all, does anyone feel any less compassionate for someone raped twenty, forty or sixty years ago than they do for someone who was raped one year ago or one day ago? – No – empathy for someone who has been a victim of violent crime does not have a time limit.

        Hugo offered a reasoned explanation of why a certain prejudice exists- fine – but he also cleverly excuses it by using a double standard for the accountability of that prejudice. An explanation of a prejudice exists is not an excuse to accept prejudice; and just because a person understands WHY someone is prejudiced against them, doesn’t mean that they feel any better about the prejudice. It is a poor motivator for change, because it’s asking (no, demanding) the repayment of someone else’s debt while conceding that the prejudice is justified, and that the prejudice is going to continue regardless. Think about this. That is not what inspires people. 

        Gwen, what brilliant about your example (I think) was that is was aspirational  – THAT is what inspires people. That’s where change has chance to begin – not from Hugo’s incessant moralizing and brow-beating about collective guilt. Double standards, even when cleverly justified, don’t inspire the will to change- when that’s the case, there is no joy, even in achieving the goal. Hugo can gently dictate very eloquently, but he does not inspire. We all (men and women) deserve better than that.      

        No one wants a climate of perpetual hate, fear, mistrust and violence. We want harmony, not discord. In war, the ones who want to keep the conflict going the most are the ones who peddle the weapons. In gender discourses, it’s the agitators (and there are agitators, some well intentioned, on both sides of the gender & ideological divides) who seem to want to keep the fighting going- after all; if (pardon me, WHEN) the fighting ends, they’re out of a job. Whether you love their writing or hate it, it’s a fact.

        Just a thought.

  51. William,

    Actually, no, I believe that yours was the point I was sarcastically making.

  52. moreover, rape isn’t celebrated in mainstream books, television, magazines, music, news outlets, or art. No in all of these mainstream examples, rape is clearly portrayed as evil and vile if it’s ever portrayed at all. I personally have never known anyone to suggest anything approaching the idea that rape is positive. If anyone in this forum can link me to any examples of popular culture portraying rape in a positive light, I would gladly peruse it myself.

  53. lela

    “Rob, I hate to point this out to someone who is “not an idiot” but if you look at the eighth sentence in the wikipedia article on rape statistics that you just linked, you’ll notice this quote “Estimates from research suggest that between 75 and 95 per cent of rape crimes are never reported to the police.”

    Even if this assertion is true, which it’s not, you still end up with less than One percent!!! That’s basic math. And you would similarly have to subtract the number of false rape claims, which I didn’t. The estimation of unreported rapes is spurious at best. Unverifiable information is exactly that, the methodology used in these studies is dubious, and varies from institution to institution. The fact that these studies are pushed by women’s rights groups makes them questionable. The most disingenuous feature of these studies, is the sliding scale definitions. If you ask 1000 women if they were raped, 1 or 2 will say yes. If you ask if they were pressured, or, had you drank any alcohol…the numbers climb. But this goes to the question of Moral agency. If a woman has moral agency, she is responsible for her own choices, and unless she was forcibly raped, or drugged, then she made her own decisions. If she felt “pressured into sex,” then she cannot be considered a full moral agent. Either she’s responsible for her own actions or she isn’t. So if a man didn’t physially force her or spike her drink, No one can suggest that she was raped. It doesn’t matter if she regrets the decision later. If a man feels pressured into doing something, he’s stuck with that decision, there’s no do-overs, no take-backs, no changies. Women should not be afforded this luxury either.

    “And if you follow the news at all you will have noted it all over the place that the FBI has just this week taken steps to revamp its antiquated and problematic definition of “rape” because it causes so many problems in gathering accurate statistics in this area of crime reporting.”

    I am aware of the new standards being circulated by the FBI. When numbers are published under those new standards we will be able to measure under those standards. But I suspect that even with new looser definitions, law abiding men will restrain their behavior even more, and the percentage of rape will hold close to static. Although in my opinion, some of the provisions in the new rape are laughable, and a little tragic.

    “And further, if you follow the news at all, you will have noted that the CDC has just issued a groundbreaking report on sexual violence by intimate partners. Let me quote from the press release, “On average, 24 people per minute are victims of rape, physical violence, or stalking by an intimate partner in the United States, according to findings released today by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Over the course of a year, that equals more than 12 million women and men. Those numbers only tell part of the story – more than 1 million women REPORTED being raped in a year and over 6 million women and men were victims of stalking in a year, the report says.” [emphasis mine]”

    From the same study, it found that women initiated partner violence 55% of the time. and domestic violence was highest by far among lesbian couples.

    • “Even if this assertion is true, which it’s not, you still end up with less than One percent!!! That’s basic math.” Rob, your understanding of basic math is spurious at best.

      It is pointless to debate with a conspiracy theorist. I shouldn’t have taken the bait.

      Rob, you’re wrong. If you continue to dismiss out of hand any information which does not uphold your theory (especially information from reputable sources – sources which you yourself cite until they contradict your theory), then your view of the greater world will continue to get smaller and smaller.

  54. Lela: Even with the most liberal view of rape statistics, that %95 percent of rapes and sexual assaults are unreported. then the number goes up to 3,420,000, or 2.2%? Sorry, that still doesn’t sound like a majority, that still sounds like over 97% men are not rapists? 97.7% ronded down to be more precise. I mean, to me the fact that nearly 98% of men are not rapists or sexual assaulters still sounds like good news.

    But if you don’t like these statistics, what do you think the number should be? Please, find any source that gets the number up close to 25%, I will shut up. I just don’t think that there is any measurement that will yield such dramatically high number of rapes and sexual assaults.

    It’s sounds more like you are the one who can’t accept that men just aren’t as evil as you’ve been taught!

    Yeah, and that’s the conspiracy of truth!

    • Although I said this above as well: “What would get this number close to 25%”? Perhaps not confusing rates with sums. You use rates. If she too is relying on rates, then the number of rapes per year is 2.5% of men. Unless these men, and only these men, commit rapes, the actual number is much higher. If it were always distinct, the number would be, over time (about 50 years) 100%. In actuality most rapes are committed by serial rapists (which means the number of men who rape is far lower than the number of women who are raped), but allowing for such does not let us know what the real number is. However, given that more women are raped than are men rapists means it is prudent for a woman to distrust.

      One does not need a ‘source’ as you claim, but an understanding of math and rates vs sums.

  55. Personally, I think that the rape statistics are encouraging. To be able to confidently state that over 97% of men are not rapists or sexual assaulter, makes me feel very very good!

  56. lela:

    it sounds like you are trying to shame John for choosing to be active and aggressive. But you also say that we all should be free to choose whatever gender identity we want? So how can John be wrong for stating his preference for traditional roles if that’s what he wants?

    moreover, you stated that this preference and gender identity leads to rape culture. does this mean that homos-sexual men and women are also establishing rape culture when they accept these roles?

    o that’s right, rape culture doesn’t exist. my bad

    John, what you said before….keep it up!

  57. Steph
    Comment:
    “…are stuck being involuntarily celibate…”

    So, men are entitled to sex?

    you can’t be involuntarily celibate if you really feel entitled to sex. men who feel entitled to sex are the actual rapists. No one who speaks about involuntary celibacy is a rapist.

    As for the other distasteful side effects of modern culture…I seem to remember there was this chivalry long ago, but some feminists got together and called it sexist and demeaning. They kept saying that women and men are equal, should be treated equally. Now men treat you like they treat other men. Oops.

  58. Michael Rowe says, “You’re an idiot, Rob”

    Actually, Michael, you’re and idiot and so is Hugo. It never fails to amaze me how men can actually support feminism. How weak and emasculated can you get? Feminism is a hate movement – pure and simple. Yet, we have no shortage of men (for want of a better word) whom are more than willing to sell out their own gender based on lies and misconceptions.

    “Rob” is just about the only voice of reason in this thread.

    • Michael Rowe says:

      Hey Special K, you just made my night! I’d rather be called “an idiot” in Hugo Schwyzer’s company than almost anyone else’s. And as for “how weak and emasculated can you get,” I suggest you look in the mirror. Then sit down and put your feet up and do some deep-breathing exercises before you stroke out with the frustration of it all.

  59. lela says “between 75 and 95 per cent of rape crimes are never reported to the police.”

    “Rapes” not reported to police are a non-issue. If they were actual rapes, why didn’t the women in question report them to the police? Please don’t drag up BS about fear of not being belied. You know well as I do that police forced are hugely indoctrinated to believe the woman never lies. The reality is that all these non-reported “rapes” are nothing more than a deliberate distortion of facts to promote an anti-male agenda.

  60. Thank you Robert, I appreciate it.

    I do want to re-iterate my central point. That pitting classes against one another is the way that Marxism erodes a society to prepare it for domination. It is for this reason I want to offer friendship to all other Americans because we are all in this together. We can stand together to fight for everything noble and good, which is what this society was built on.

  61. Robert, you know what’s even better news… even if you accept their 75 to 95% number, the total number of rapes and sexual assaults still come down to less than 3% of the population. That is really great news! Women don’t need to live in fear, and you and I don’t need to live in shame!

  62. Michael Rowe

    “MRA…drama queens”

    Really? We didn’t invent rape hysteria that’s not us. We didn’t create imaginary studies to try and sell the idea that Rape is one of the most pernicious, ubiquitous, and common male characteristics, or that there exists some secret society of men training all of us to be all “rapey,” and to oppress women.

    Feminists, in a cynical play for power played on the fears and insecurities of women by telling them that there was a rapist around every corner, down every dark alley, even, gasp, in your own bedroom. That is drama, pure drama…and none of that was me. So please. You already know I am smarter than you, and that I have all the facts on my side. All you have left is snark, and weak tea snark at that…seriously.

    besides if you had any facts you’d use them instead of insulting MRAs.

    drama queens? there here but it’s not us.

  63. I would have to say, though I appreciate the sentiment, most women I have met (though this may or may not represent the views as a general whole) do not see new men as potential rapists. We see them the same way we see new women – as potential friends or foes.

    Generally because fear is a greater motivator, we see both new men and new women with distrust. I expect that, because men are expected by society to initiate first contact, they experience this phenomenon (of being distrusted rather than being the one distrusting) more than woman may. I don’t think its reasonable or prudent for anyone to assume the best without SOME level of reservation about anyone.

    While I (hopefully) demonstrated to Rob above the difference between rates and sums, and concluded that rape is not a ‘hyped’ phenomenon, I also firmly say that a womans’ life and social interactions do not revolve around the fear of sexual molestation (excepting women who have been extensively abused).

    • Pardon the secondary comment, but part of the above seemed snarky. Studying for the GMAT, so noticing logical errors is pleasant at the moment. Do please pardon the implied vitriol.

      • Mostly123 says:

        “Pardon the secondary comment, but part of the above seemed snarky. Studying for the GMAT, so noticing logical errors is pleasant at the moment. Do please pardon the implied vitriol.”

        Hugo can stir up a lot of divisiveness. Because we all feel so passionately about these issues, it can be intensely frustrating when we feel somebody else is being unjustly obtuse or condescending. It is not a sign of weakness when we tone the volume down a bit- it’s a sign of strength, discipline, and mutual respect. It is a courtesy I relish receiving (and in return, I should try to give it more often)

        So, thank you for adding that: So much of the discord and disagreement in gender (and other political) dialogues comes from misunderstandings in tone and framing of discussions.
        Snark filter has been set to maximum: Anyway, I always try to assume the best of intentions from people until they demonstrate otherwise (which usually takes a while, and requires a lot of diagrams and colourful illustrations because I myself am not very smart…)

  64. Gwen
    “Ron – you are confusing RATES with the sum that, over time, commit rape. For instance: I travel 60 miles per hour. Does this mean I have only ever traveled sixty miles? NO! It means EACH HOUR I travel sixty miles. Let us assume each year the number who rape and the number that are raped are distinct. Then, over a 20 year period, the supposed number of men who are rapists jumps to 2.5%. That may not sound like a big number, but it means more than 1 in 50 men a woman meets may have raped someone. I’m not saying this is the case. Studies show most rapes occur by SERIAL rapists – that is they rape, and rape, and rape.

    However, you also missed that 1 in 6 women have been the victim of attempted or completed rape. This correlates to 16.6% of women. Lets say for a moment that only one third are the victims of completed rape. That drops it down to little more than 5% of women – but thats one in 20! Thats a LOT of women who end up getting raped. Worse, it doesn’t match up with the contention that 2.5% of men or less are rapists. Those serial rapists must REALLY be at it!”

    In my own experience, 3 out of 8 women I had a personal conversation with had been raped or experienced sexual assault. None had reported to any agency (one was too young to know how to appropriately react when it occurred to her). The threat for women is real, not imagined.

    Whats more, rape is one of the strangest crimes – women are expected to say ‘no’ in order for rape to count. When we are robbed, is it actually ‘giving’ someone money if we don’t fight back? If we are drunk when we are robbed, is the robber mitigated of responsibility? If you sometimes loan money to a friend, is he allowed to go into your wallet and take some money without getting express permission? No!”

    I won’t quibble with your first points as they are logical and make sense. You are still dealing with a miniscule portion of male rapists. That should seem incouraging.

    What I must content with you on two points: the disparity of legal responsibility between and inebriated man and woman in a sexual encounter. A more appropriate illustration for many of these situations would be drunk driving. Both men and women are held equally responsible if they cause damage or injury, yet only a man is held legally responsible if they have sex. This disparity is injustice. Letting her off the hook while he goes to jail is sinister. Why should this be? Why isn’t she guilty of rape? Why isn’t he just as much a victim if he is inebriated? I know of dozens of my friends who were seduced by women using liquor, and all of them regretted it later. Why isn’t this also rape. You no doubt find this idea laughable. But if a woman willingly gets drunk why isn’t she legally as responsible for her actions as if she were driving? So I don’t think any women should get a pass if she’s drinking. So, if you want to prosecute the man for rape when she’ drunk, you better prosecute them both.

    The other issue is the definition of sexual assault. For this i have two points, the first: There needs to be one and only one standard for sexual assault. I don’t care what the standard is, but clearly articulate the line, and none of us law abiding guys will cross it. The other issue with sexual assault I must say legitimately comes down to differing expectations in differing situations. I have met girls who have been frustrated when I wasn’t aggressive enough, and at least one who thought I was way too aggressive. The situation with the second was me rubbing her arms as she leaned against my legs. At the time, she acted like she was enjoying, had a smile on, was talking and engaged, had only moments previously stated that she wanted to be part of a “flesh sandwich.” The next day this same girl acted offended and said that I had violated her boundaries. I hate to say this, but it is not my fault if she changes her mind afterward, and/or withouot telling me. Even one to another, no two women seem to be on the same page as far as what’s appropriate. I have little sympathy for a woman in this situation. I certainly don’t beleive that any of this rises to the level of criminal or even sexual behavior, but if she wants to, she can have his ass arrested for this.

    Women also have many other noxious behavior that we just have accept like provocative dress and sexual teasing and being led on. No matter what she does, we are always supposed to stop when she says stop.

    The ceaseless sexual provocation by women is a big reason why I have stopped dating. women fight dirty and always play the victim, even when they pick fights and escalate violence, they know that they can use the victim card to get out of most trouble. It’s dispicable.

    • Ron –
      Although few men are rapists, the number of women raped is high, and sadly women cannot tell rapists from non-rapists in casual conversation. The fact that they continue to be successful in their raping behaviors suggests they may be able to hide their nature well. To the extent that your argument contends women should not be wary of men on this basis (any more than one should be wary of all people for the crimes of a few) – I agree. Yet this is a particularly devastating phenomena, which I treat (without evidence, to be sure) as being more emotionally harmful than, say, getting robbed. Women feel that being raped can devalue them as a person (i.e. they are no longer ‘dating material’) whereas getting robbed will not likewise produce such negative societal consequences.

      I don’t find the idea of male rape laughable. I think its under addressed and far more prevalent than society is willing to admit to. Our culture – perpetuated by both men and women – treat men as all-sexual beings. Its unfair, even deplorable. I strongly support better protection for mens sexual rights.

      However, in many drunk-rape cases the man is sober while the female is inebriated (or she is passed out). I won’t say that when each partner is inebriated its not hard to tell – it is, and in those circumstances, I’d be in a difficult position in a jury. Yet were a woman passed-out drunk, or was inebriated while the male was sober, there is little contention – it IS rape. The same is true were the man drunk but not the female. Women might say ‘well he had an erection so he must have wanted it’ – but that’s as poor an argument as saying HE wanted it. Yet many men will not stand up and say they were raped in such a manner because he will be treated as unmanly by society. I.E. ‘A man NOT wanting sex? What, was he gay?’ The unfortunate presumption is that all men want sex all the time.

      However, your further comment that women ‘acting provocative and flirty’ is noxious seems to miss the idea that, perhaps, many women like to dress up because it makes them feel good, NOT because they want to turn you – or other men – on. By that same concept, if a guy is flirty with me, I should be offended if he doesn’t bed me. Flirtation is an individually defined behavior as much as any social interaction. For instance, I have many male friends I like to laugh with. It is understood that sharing humor is, amongst us, not flirty. Other men would find this behavior flirty. Just as men should not be responsible for all possible instances of sexual harassment, so too should women not be held responsible for all possible ways being friendly could be construed as being flirty.

      In the case of the woman you were referring to, I would strongly recommend expressing your difficulty reading her body language (were such an event to recur) and ask that she explicitly state any feelings of discomfort. This supposedly removes the ‘romance’, but in all honestly it makes it easier for everyone involved.

      Do please avoid treating women (or men, too, really) as a unit in your arguments, it removes credibility from what otherwise may be legitimate arguments.

      • gwen, why is it necessarily a rape when the man is sober and the woman is drunk? whether or not the man is drunk has no effect on the woman’s ability or willingness to consent. unless you are saying that a drunk woman cannot give consent, in which case drunk man/drunk woman hookups are instances of rape, making many millions of women victims of rape every single night in this country.

        drunk men are perfectly capable of coercing drunk women to engage in sexual activities, so unless you believe that drunk man/drunk woman hookups are necessarily instances of rape, i don’t see how you can assert that sober man/drunk woman hookups are always instances of rape.

        just because the man is sober and the woman is drunk in many instances of rape does not mean that it’s necessarily a rape when the participants fit that description.

        • she typed ” in many drunk-rape cases the man is sober while the female is inebriated ”

          i dont think she is assuming or implying sexual assault only occurs btwn a sober man and drunk 1oman.

        • MorgainePendragon says:

          Having sex with someone who is intoxicated is LEGALLY rape:

          “The crime of rape (or “first-degree sexual assault” in some states) generally refers to non-consensual sexual intercourse that is committed by physical force, threat of injury, or other duress.

          ***A lack of consent can include the victim’s inability to say “no” to intercourse, due to the effects of drugs or alcohol.***

          Rape can occur when the offender and victim have a pre-existing relationship (sometimes called “date rape”), or even when the offender is the victim’s spouse.”

          *** emphasis mine

          http://criminal.findlaw.com/crimes/a-z/rape.html

          To suggest otherwise IS an intrinsic element of RAPE CULTURE.

          • “A lack of consent can include the victim’s inability to say “no” to intercourse, due to the effects of drugs or alcohol.***”

            Where does it say, if you had sex while drunk, you were raped???

            I think this statement opens the door to the possibility that someone is unable to defend themself or say no due because of alcohol, but it doesn’t assume that because you were affected by alcohol that you WERE raped.

            and suggesting that having sex with someone who is intoxicated is not rape is not intrinsic elemnt of rape culture.

            now if I suggested that someone who claimed that they were raped has no right to do so because he/she chose to get drunk is an intrinsic element of rape culture.

          • “Having sex with someone who is intoxicated is LEGALLY rape:”

            This fucking annoys me no end. Just because you drunk alcohol or even were throw up drunk does not mean you do not have the ability to consent to sex. Your inhibitions may be low (something you are fully responsible for given that you decided to drink) but this does not imply that you are incapable of reasoning.

            The reason feminists want to promote the idea that anybody who drinks a glass of alcohol is incapable of consent is because they want to increase conviction rates. The reason is that feminists assume women never lie about rape and so it would be more just for conviction rates to be 100%. This is all about increasing conviction rates.

            Otherwise there is NO REASON to bring alcohol into this. Alcohol consumption is completely irrelevant. The relevant factor IS physical or mental incapacity. Why even mention alcohol.

            The truth is that alcohol is a red herring specifically used by feminists to increase conviction rates. Its a way of eliminating the presumption of innocence without actually doing it directly.

          • “Having sex with someone who is intoxicated is LEGALLY rape”

            Holy cow, Migraine, that means that millions and millions of men and women have been raping each other for centuries.

            But in all seriousness, I am struck by Migraine’s refusal to distinguish between being passed-out drunk, and merely being tipsy. And it makes me wonder, which is truly worse: right-wing puritanism or left-wing puritanism.

            • van Rooinek says:

              And it makes me wonder, which is truly worse: right-wing puritanism or left-wing puritanism.

              Puritans weren’t puritanical by the modern understanding of the term. They were very “sex-positive”, provided it was all confined to marriage. The early New England Puritans once actually excommunicated a man for the sin of failing to sexually satisfy his wife. Oh, and Puritans were all for moderate alcohol usage as well.

              That said: Modern day right wing puritans, ie all our family and friends and pastors, thought it was a great idea to spend part of our honeymoon touring the Napa valley. Left wing puritans, by contrast, would accuse us of raping each other every night, using Cabernet Sauvingnon as a weapon!

    • “There needs to be one and only one standard for sexual assault. I don’t care what the standard is, but clearly articulate the line, and none of us law abiding guys will cross it.”

      I find it disconcerting that you need someone else to define the standards for sexual assault and that you are more concerned with how the standard affects you being viewed by society as a potential offender, rather than how well this standard will protect people from being sexually assaulted.

      Sexual assault is wrong whether or not the law says it is and regardless of what standards have articulated by a select few members of our society.

      While your concerns regarding mixed signals and miscommunication or deliberately misleading signals is valid, I think your missing the point of the article in its entirety.

      • van Rooinek says:

        find it disconcerting that you need someone else to define the standards for sexual assault

        Well… we oldfashioned men are pretty darned clear on what is, and what isn’t, rape. And we’d never do the real thing. However, the modern culture has sought to blur the lines and expand the boundaries, to the point where men can be accused of rape under circumstances where no rational person, or at least no rational man, could have interpreted it as rape ** at the time it was occurring**. So… fine…. expand the boundaries if you wish…. just tell us WHERE THEY ARE. Exactly. Should a man require that a woman pass a breathalyzer test before sex? Is a glass of wine at dinner, forever forbidden as part of courtship rituals? Do we need signed, legally witnessed consent before the act? (Full circle — that used to be called a marriage license.)

        The fundamentalist solution, is to go back to the old ways: No sex til marriage. That’s the path I followed. Yet even that didn’t insulate me from having the R word thrown falsely at me in anger by someone that I hadn’t even had sex with!!!!!

        and that you are more concerned with how the standard affects you being viewed by society as a potential offender, rather than how well this standard will protect people from being sexually assaulted.

        He’s not going to actually assualt anyone. Law or no law. He’s worried about facing decades in prison for a consensual act that was regretted the next day, or some similar nonsense. I’d hazard a guess that an innocent man who spends ten years in prison for a crime he didn’t commit, is at least as damaged by that experience, as a women who is raped for one evening.

  65. Guen, you’ve been by far the least snarky of the commenters, and actually remind me of someone I actually have a generally positive relationship with.

    on the drunk thing, I don’t think I can support charges being brought if both are concious, I just don’t think you can blame mutual actors who in any other situation be mutually charged. This however is unlikely to be adopted as the legal standard.

    “However, your further comment that women ‘acting provocative and flirty’ is noxious seems to miss the idea that, perhaps, many women like to dress up because it makes them feel good, NOT because they want to turn you – or other men – on.”

    I do understand the uncomfortable reality we all face, cuz the geenie aint never going back inside that d**** bottle! no way, no how! In reality if I don’t want to see sexy half naked women I should close my eyes or stay home. I gotta be honest there are days when i figure I would be better off gouging out my eyes or cutting off balls. It’s just not realistic, as much as I wish it feel like I was getting kicked in balls everytime one of these hot little numbers walks by. Her body herself right? But I wouldn’t dream of taking away that right to be hot…

    • Perhaps an alternative is to promote more men walking around scantily clad? I’d be all for that one! 😀

    • PursuitAce says:

      I like that Rob. “Provocative dress and sexual teasing”, is not something we have to accept. Not when sexual harassment is rampant. I will no longer accept that as anything but incredibly rude and sexually harassing behavior. Thanks for that eye-opening insight.

  66. DavidByron says:

    I notice that @lt;blockquote@gt;….@lt;/blockquote@gt; works,

    like this

    so I was wondering if any other html works on these forums?
    test
    test
    test

  67. DavidByron says:
    December 18, 2011 at 2:44 am
    How about just “equality”?
    ———-

    This is a good question, but surprisingly so far I have not noticed that GMP-moderators are deleting my comments or banning my ID despite I am standing firmly with the MRAs out of many reasons.

    I also noticed, that some few contributions were made by MRA-friendly authors, like Paul Elam or Toysoldier, despite feminists were complaining so much to the GMP for publishing their articles.

    I think, most MRAs are not really interested to write even a short comment as they mistrust the GMP and see it as a feminist outpost, questioning the purpose of this website.

    I also think, in return, the GMP is not much interested either to receive articles from MRAs as they are not politically correct. MRAs have their own forums and blogs and females are welcome to sign up with us anytime and to check out what kind of people we really are.

    The Western society, especially those in USA and UK accepts only women as victims and men as aggressors. See Hugo’s articles. That’s plainly wrong, but so much about ‘equality’.

    • DavidByron says:

      Most MRAs tend to be politically on the right and I am far left so I have a foot in either camp really.

      The filter mostly seems to be picking up language that I would not especially have thought of as being particularly bad, like maybe A-S-S. I’ve been banned from hundreds of feminist sites (literally) so I am sensitive to this stuff, but right now Julie has won me over on the censorship thing.

      There’s a more subtle issue though. MRAs are ANGRY a lot. And for good reason. And of course this site WANTS to be able to allow men to express their full emotions. But then if they do they hit the automated comment filter. And then even if they get manually passed through eventually their distrust shoots up. Hit the filter a couple of times and they will quit.

      Someone also said the site has few working class guys. Possibly a similar issue there with language that may not even be intended as angry hitting the filter. If you keep hitting the filter you feel like a second class citizen on the forum even if you are getting posted eventually.

    • Julie Gillis says:

      I actually have no idea how many mods they have, if they have shifts, or so forth. I’ve been able to be at home, lazing about the past few days and I’m learning the system so its’ been easy for me to have time to look at comments that might get stuck, but if I’m gone a few hours there are hundreds to go back through. I don’t see any kind of “ban X or Y” messages going out.

      • Julie Gillis says:

        I saw only one from you in Mod, Yohan. It was filled with “f*c&s” and such which is probably why it got held up? Nothing in trash from you. Dunno about the other ones you are missing.

        • Julie Gillis says:
          December 18, 2011 at 11:23 pm
          I saw only one from you in Mod, Yohan. It was filled with “f*c&s” and such which is probably why it got held up? Nothing in trash from you. Dunno about the other ones you are missing.

          ——————————————————-
          @ Moderator Julie Gillis

          Sorry, but something must be wrong here.

          1 – I do not miss any posting
          2 – I never wrote something offensive like “f*c&s” and such …
          (English is not my native language and I do not use these words)

          Feel free to read back by comments, there are not so many…

          Are you sure you are addressing the right person?
          Or is somebody misusing my name?

          Please show me this comment!

          Thank you, Yohan

          P.S. I have some problems here with sending this comment, hopefully it appears now.

  68. Tom Brechlin says:

    Women feel the way they do for one reason and one reason alone and that’s because the feminist movement has trained women to believe that men are bad and most of them just want one thing and that’s sex.

    Example is that Verizon has a “Monster in the closet” video that shows that only MEN are abusers and male children of abusive men will become abusers ass well. NOTHING about the women abuse toward men.

    • The feminist movement has not “trained” women to believe that men are bad- you’re missing the entire point of the article here. The author’s assertion is that women’s responses to men are formed by a consistent pattern. Your rebuttal to that seems to be that women aren’t the only victims, which is most certainly true, but the majority of domestic violence cases involve crimes against women.

      No feminist, including myself, believes that ALL men are abusers and again- that’s not what the article is about. It’s explaining why women might feel ill at ease with men based upon their past, not explaining why they would treat men poorly- because there isn’t an excuse for abusive behavior, be it against a woman or a man.

      • Tom Brechlin says:

        Are you serious? Perhaps your young and don’t know what it was like 30 years ago when the feminists started to take control. “Men bad, women victims” which is exactly what this article says. Women are trained to “protect” themselves in relationships INCLUDING marriage. How would you personally feel if society stereotyped you simply because of your gender? Men are suspect in a lot of areas simply because they are men. Men have been moved from seats on airplanes simply because they are seated next to a child. Some places have prohibeted Santas from allowing children to sit on their laps. And where did all this come from? The feminists who have trained women and the general population in believing that men are bad.

        We also forget that anyone that is truly a rapist has nothing to do with gender. True rapists are sick individuals but we have gone past that and simply made it a gender issue. And who did that? The feminists that have and are training a society to view men as bad.

        You say that women are simply following a consistant pattern. I don’t know where you’re from but I have only known one women who was raped and that was where a man had broken into her home. It wasn’t a guy she was dating, had met at a bar, it was a home invasion. But I will tell you this, I work with adolescent males in a residential setting and I can tell you there are MANY young boys who have been exposed to sexual abuse by females. But feminists don’t care about them, do they? MOST battered women and children shelters will not allow teen boys because of their gender. Even though these children may have been abused as well, “Women” view these boys as a threat and accordingly, these kids are on their own.

        Even with my personal knowledge of how women are perpetrators, I don’t look at any women as potential abusers.

        Now I’m gonna flip the script ….. It’s about time that men be educated on how abusive women are and that they really should be ill at ease women women they may meet. In reality men are targets and subject to various abuses including false allegations of abuse, rape and stalking. Take a look at the real stats regarding the above.

  69. Actually, publishing content that spreads hate against a group or gender is against the Adsense terms of service. This website uses Adsense advertisement and is therefore bound by contract to not publish such content.
    So, if you feel this is a hate spreading article, then you should inform the site owner and/or inform Adsense. They are known to be very strict about enforcing adherence to their program policy.

  70. PursuitAce

    Yeah, I don’t know why men haven’t initiated more lawsuits against women flirting and wearing provocative clothing in public areas. I mean all of us men have watch what we say and do at work so as not to offend the sensitivity of women who may overhear. I am not sure how sexually provocative dress which produces measurable physiological effects in men in terms of hormone release and greatly increased stress levels mixed with physical discomfort. I am not sure why any man should be forced to endure something that has a more demonstrable effect than even high grade porn! Sexual jokes can be offensive but seeing a sexy women is the equivalent to being injected with adrenaline, steroids, and cocaine. But we are just supposed to endure the unwanted sexual assault through our eyes?

  71. Michael, I just wanted to notify you that a reply from me is currently held in moderation.

  72. Julie Gillis says:
    December 18, 2011 at 11:23 pm
    I saw only one from you in Mod, Yohan. It was filled with “f*c&s” and such which is probably why it got held up? Nothing in trash from you. Dunno about the other ones you are missing.

    ——————————————————-
    @ Moderator Julie Gillis

    Sorry, but something must be wrong here.

    1 – I do not miss any posting
    2 – I never wrote something offensive like “f*c&s” and such …
    (English is not my native language and I do not use these words)

    Feel free to read back by comments, there are not so many…

    Are you sure you are addressing the right person?
    Or is somebody misusing my name?

    Please show me this comment!

    Thank you, Yohan

  73. Julie Gillis says:
    December 18, 2011 at 11:23 pm
    I saw only one from you in Mod, Yohan. It was filled with “f*c&s” and such which is probably why it got held up? Nothing in trash from you. Dunno about the other ones you are missing.

    ——————————————————-
    @ Moderator Julie Gillis

    Sorry, but something must be wrong here.

    1 – I do not miss any posting
    2 – I never wrote something offensive like “f*c&s” and such …
    (English is not my native language and I do not use these words)

    Feel free to read back by comments, there are not so many…

    Are you sure you are addressing the right person?
    Or is somebody misusing my name?

    Please show me this comment!

    Thank you, Yohan

  74. Something that feminists and other marxists never seem to understand or accept is that just because you can’t accomplish something doesn’t mean that someone else is holding you down, or oppressing you, or restricting access. It just means that you aren’t very good at what you are trying to do. There are at least 100, (some estimate more than 1000,) applicants for every opening at the US Navy SEALs training School each rotation, Of those who actually qualify to begin school, more than 70% wash out. Out of the applicants selects for the best and then lets the best fight it out amongst themselves, to determine who is the best of the best. This means that over 99% of these applicants fail. Is this proof of the Patriarchy holding down some of those men? Clearly no, but in any other context feminists sue for special treatment.

    If the best of the best in given fields speak candidly about how tough a certain accomplishment is, how hard they had to study, how much pressure there was, how ruthless the competition was, How often they wanted to give up, and how no one ever seemed to believe in them, and how most of their competitors, peers washed out, then can we really believe women when they are petulant about no succeeded at something that shockingly nearly all men fail at also? Women don’t seem to be able to acknowledge when they aren’t actually the best, nor do they accept that being the best at something should be the standard, or that if the standard doesn’t automatically see them as the best than the systems broke. Children make far more rationale arguments than this.

    At least with men, whining is the purview of the weak. If you have what it takes you succeed, and if you don’t, you make excuses. More honorably you accept your failure and learn and improve because of it. It makes feminists doubly hard to take because they claim on one hand that they are equal, and on the other they are being oppressed. But only the weak can be oppressed, and women clearly are not weak. So why the whining? Simple, playing the victim card for political clout pays off big in the public arena. Even when everyone knows it’s BS.

    • Michael Rowe says:

      Elsewhere, on planets other than Planet Rob, it’s generally acknowledged that feminists run the political gamut from far left to far right. Only on Planet Rob and other pointy-headed MRA galaxies far, far away from reality are feminists exclusively “Marxists.”

  75. It’s a shame that Schwyzer’s emergent sense of justice and fairness was obliterated by feminist brainwashing. He was right to object to such presumptive-guilt treatment by women–it is, in fact, unreasonable and unfair. To accept the argument that “some women have suffered at the hands of some men, therefore YOU deserve suspicioin and hostility” is to abandon all sense of reason and justice.

    Repeat after me, veterans of the civil rights era: your group’s past suffering doesn’t justify your inflicting bigotry on others in return. Hugo the student felt angry, and rightly so; but he also felt guilty for some indefinable reason, and the feminist cult was only too happy to explain that his guilt was not only appropriate, but deserved. And another flickering light of reason was extinguished at the altar of feminist indoctrination.

    • anonymouswoman says:

      It isn’t guilt treatment. It is simply that women do not trust men to be ‘good guys’ without getting to know them first. Which is as it should be. Trust is earned, not automatic.

      The framing was problematic on this piece IMO. It’s not about presuming guilt, it’s about not immediately assuming that each and every strange man you meet is a ‘good guy’.

      • Julie Gillis says:

        Do you remember fairy tales? Trolls under bridges? Kids were taught those as morality and safety lessons. Humans are capable of being animals or monsters. There isn’t much way to tell who is going to lie, cheat, steal or slap until it happens. We have to ride a fine line between trust and distrust, preparation and protection and freedom. It’s a hard line.

        • anonymouswoman says:

          Exactly. Women can’t afford to assume that just because a guy seems nice the first time you meet him, that nothing bad will happen if she goes back to his hotel room just after meeting him (to use Rebecca Watson’s experience as an example).

          • Julie Gillis says:

            But I think it’s deeper than that. It’s deeper than men and women, because for all we know a woman in the elevator could be a monster too. We don’t know and can only judge based on our eyes and our past experiences, and so we silo experiences (look for the odds) and a system is created that as we can see causes a great deal of consternation for its participants.
            I sure hope the dude in the Elevator with Rebecca never ever heard that story. Could you imagine knowing you were the genesis of Elevator Gate? I was so fascinated by the reaction to the piece.

            • anonymouswoman says:

              I thought this piece was mostly focusing on the threat of sexual assault that women face. Women aren’t so suspicious of or worried about other women due to the possibility of being sexually assaulted. When we walk out in parking lots late at night alone, we’re not so much worried about another woman attacking us. Same goes for being propositioned in elevators. If we refuse to go back to have a cup of coffee with a woman, I doubt many of us would be worried of an unpleasant reaction on the part of the woman inviting us back to their room. However I know that for me personally, I would be very, very careful how I worded my refusal to a strange man in an elevator. Very careful. In fact I probably would ‘playfully’ hem and haw and dance around other subjects until I was at my floor and then only leave as I was exiting the elevator. Accompanied by an adrenaline rush borne of fear, as well.

              It’s likely that many women don’t have that reaction, but some of us do. Many, most likely.

            • anonymouswoman says:

              Sorry, I meant I would only state my refusal as I was exiting the elevator. Oops.

            • Julie Gillis says:

              This thread is. I’m just expanding it to create more room for understanding. Or trying to. 😉

            • DavidByron says:

              I bet the guy was some Hugo-like male feminist who really was asking her back for coffee and nothing else, and now is so hyper embarrassed because he’s been labeled as a sexual pervert by his heroine, Rebecca Watson, that he won’t speak up.

              I don’t see how the guy can’t have heard of elevatorgate because how many folks are there who go to an international atheist convention and yet are not tuned into the internet enough to hear about it all? How many people know and like Rebecca Watson who don’t ever read her blog?

          • The most appropriate response to being treated as a suspected rapist is to point out “Your irrational paranoia is not my fault. It’s also not my problem.” And ignore them from then on.

      • Tom Brechlin says:

        Then we can also presume that we should be suspect of every women we meet for the first time. I know plent of men that have been royally screwed over by women. In fact I know more men that have got the shaft then women.

  76. If feminism was in anyway serious about ending abuse, as opposed to using it a a means to rabble rouse and spread hate. It would be drawing attention to the fact that it starts in the home and that women commit most of the violence there, instead of lying about it glossing over it.

  77. Michael Rowe
    Comment:
    Elsewhere, on planets other than Planet Rob, it’s generally acknowledged that feminists run the political gamut from far left to far right. Only on Planet Rob and other pointy-headed MRA galaxies far, far away from reality are feminists exclusively “Marxists.”

    unfortunately, I can only speak of the feminists that inhabit my planet. I wouldn’t be so bold as to call it mine though. I am flattered you think I deserve one. That means a lot, so, thanks! I mean that. Oh, and thanks for noticing my pointy head.

    Of course Feminists, ie., Social Marxists, run the gamut from far left to far right, it would be a tragically inept movement if they could only sell it to one tiny group. But by painting each and every possible demographic as a victim class they can feed off the broad based sense of frustration and injustice which exists because it has been foisted upon them. In reality, each and every “victim,” class has done better in america then anywhere else in the globe. That’s why they all come here. But when the Social Marxists start selling this religion of hate to breed anger and rage so that they can foment rebellion. This play has been performed countless times before. Sadly it’s apparently generally effective. The sad part is that few ever realize how bad things get during and after the revolution.

  78. John D,

    “There was a case here in america where a woman drugged her husband, bound him up, waited til he awoke then cut off his penis, testicles, and scrotum. She then threw all the pieces into the garbage disposal and ran it to make sure that it would never be able to be reattached. The reason she gave was that he was divorcing her, and she was proud of her actions. Sadly, the story doesn’t end there. One of those women’s day time talk shows, aptly named “the Talk” covered the story and each of it’s five hosts took turns mocking the brutal genital mutilation of this elderly man. Every one of them some twisted new humiliation with Sharon Osborne’s as the most heinous, when she stood up with hands and shook to simulate a penis being ground up in a disposal. Were her audience members horrified? Shocked? Apalled? No! They all laughed! A good and hard laugh!

    Women today have become calloused, bitter, hard, and angry, and how dare you tell us that you are somehow more noble than men. It is absolutely sickening! There was so much public support for this abuser and not a single female public figure did anything but praise this disgusting act. She has become a folk hero for american women. Most choosing to believe that of course he must have done something to deserve this. All of them adding that they would do the same thing in at least one circumstance! This is disgusting.

    How dare you even pretend to have some moral superiority or special sensitivity!

  79. DavidByron says:

    Title is actually wrong.
    In the “rape culture” of feminists, all men are guilty until proven female.

    If you’re male you’re always guilty.

  80. When was the last time an unknown *man* smiled back at you in the hallway or street? When a man smiles at or makes eye contact with another man, it’s usually perceived as being threatening. Indeed *I* find it more threatening to smile at another man than at woman. At worst a woman will ignore me. Another man on the other hand, is likely to get into an aggressive “what are you looking at” staring contest.

    My point is that I don’t think it’s women that exclusively mistrust men. Men are constantly very guarded against other men, either because of the need to assert heterosexuality or out of real concern for their physical safety.

  81. Just out of curiosity what is the chance that a woman will encounter a rapist? And how many men in the general population turn out to be rapists?

  82. I think Dan Savage’s judgment of Hugo as a “castrato” is validated with everything that Hugo writes. All Mr. Schywzer needs now is to go the extra surgical step and then swear never to look at or think of women again, in any context, and he will have completed the process begun in his Feminism 101 class.

    • This comment is so blatantly chauvanistic and exactly why men are continually made to feel that they need to put up this front of “masculinity” by society. It’s also a supplement of rape culture.

      Because Hugo tries to see the problem of rape from the viewpoint of women, he is less than a man and therefore not entitled to his penis?

      First of all, what makes a man a man and a woman a woman goes far beyond their genitals and it’s extremely ignorant and blatantly chauvanistic of you to suggest otherwise. Second of all, Hugo is not trying to paint all men as bad guys. He’s trying to help others and himself understand why a woman may view a man as a bad guy and he acknowledges that it is wrong and unfair, but in the same vein it is wrong and unfair for women to have to constantly be on guard when they are walking home at night or to carry pepper spray or be afraid to report a rape because they might be blamed for bringing it on themselves. We are all paying for the crimes of a few, so please don’t assume that you’re the only one that’s being mis-represented. Hugo is suggesting that men stop pointing the finger at women who are victims of rape or afraid of being victims of rape and point the finger at the people who think it’s okay to rape women or who make it okay for others to rape women.

      • I suspect that I am debating with a 19 year-old first-year undergrad under the tutelage of an angry veteran feminist from the 70s, but if this doesn’t prove that the essence of the feminist viewpoint of males is that all men are rapists, then nothing does.

        “Because Hugo tries to see the problem of rape from the viewpoint of women…He’s trying to help others and himself understand why a woman may view a man as a bad guy”

        Ah, I get it, because unless men sign-up for Hugo’s cross-gender empathy workshop, they will never consider rape a horror. No matter that many of us have sisters and daughters, it is not wired into our systems to regard rape as “bad”, so we need Hugo Schwyzer to enlighten us.

        “First of all, what makes a man a man and a woman a woman goes far beyond their genitals and it’s extremely ignorant and blatantly chauvanistic of you to suggest otherwise”

        I agree. Hugo has gone so far into expressing chronic shame for his biological gender of origin that surgery only completes a process that has been long in development. And is is a good thing that the feminist/womyn’s community has always been so receptive to individuals who identify as women, with or without hormones and/or surgery, especially at events (Michigan Womyn’s Music Festival) limited to women, right?

        “it is wrong and unfair for women to have to constantly be on guard when they are walking home at night or to carry pepper spray”

        I live in a city, and it is wrong and unfair that I have to be on guard against the possibility of being mugged, or worse. Or that my wages are too low, or that I breathe in contaminated air. Life is full on injustice, and I do my best to fight it. But unlike Hugo, I don’t blame one entire group of people for the criminal actions of some. Rapists are to blame for rape, not the entire population of men.

        “be afraid to report a rape because they might be blamed for bringing it on themselves.”

        Can you name one case in the American criminal justice system in which a man who committed a forced, involuntary act of non-consensual sex against an unwilling individual was judged “not guilty” due to the attractiveness of the plaintiff?

        “Hugo is suggesting that men stop pointing the finger at women who are victims of rape”

        Again, the underlying hypothesis is that men either are rapists, and/or automatically blame women for rape. Hugo must spend a lot of time in the company of such men, because this sure doesn’t square with any men I’ve known, including my late grandfather, a former police chief, or my cousin, a veteran police officer and father of two daughters.

        “or afraid of being victims of rape”

        Yes, Anna, being men, we automatically assume that women should think rape is perfectly okay. Because, you know, we’re men and naturally can not think otherwise.

        “and point the finger at the people who think it’s okay to rape women or who make it okay for others to rape women.”

        Like the African-American urban hip-hop culture? Or this lady: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pauline_Nyiramasuhuko

        Oh no, that would be “racist”.

        • It seems no matter what I say you are bent on painting anyone who agrees with Hugo as man-hating feminists conspiring to make men pay for all the world’s ills or women’s problems.

          This is not my intention and I don’t believe it is the intention of the article either.

          “Rapists are to blame for rape, not the entire population of men.”

          Agreed.

          • “It seems no matter what I say”

            No, if you said something that proved otherwise, I wouldn’t regard you as one of the “man-hating feminists conspiring to make men pay for all the world’s ills or women’s problems”.

            But you haven’t.

          • It would be a very accurate painting.

  83. …feminism is weird.

    A woman you have just met is just as likely to be planning to do you harm as a man (which is to say not very likely at all). Most women have not been raped. Those of us not living in South Africa or the Congo or other countries that really can be said to be in rape crisis due to social instability or war are not living in a “rape culture”. What a load of tosh.

    It’s not actually “empowering” women to make them hostile and paranoid all the time… it just makes them appear insecure and weak. Feminism makes me want to hate my gender (thankfully I know that plenty of women aren’t fooled by feminist silliness).

  84. I do not agree that good guys should hold themselves accountable. I am a woman, and a pretty modern one, and I feel that thought is nothing but ridiculous. Why because there is a percentage of people that do something wrong everybody else should pay for it? If we are going to go by that law then we should get all Germans in Jail for being neonatzies, we should forbid the entrance of Colombians to the U.S.A. because they are all drug dealers, and we shouldn’t allow blacks to walk into stores because they are all criminals. Great way of thinking, ahh? And what about women themselves, or do you think that all women in the world are angels? No there are many women that are criminals themselves and many women commit child abuse against their childre. Do you think it is fair that all mother be held accountable because there are women who are child abusers? That logic is extremely ridiculous and what is worse, places the focus on what is wrong. If you start looking only at the negative, that is all what you are going to get and attract. I do know many wonderful and amazing men and guys. Of course, I know there are bad ones but probably because I think the good ones outnumber the bad one, I’ve always find the good guys.

    • Well, I am in your corner, Kelly, and it is encouraging to have an intelligent woman’s voice in this forum. But let’s take Hugo’s logic and apply elsewhere. The Department of Justice reports that in the United States, African-American males are disproportionately represented for theft, assault, and rape, and one can argue that in American cities, there is a “crime culture”. By Hugo’s logic, until no African-American commits a street crime, ALL African-Americans are “guilty until proven innocent.” Hey, what about Bernie Madoff? I guess until no more Jewish-Americans commit white-collar crimes, by Hugo’s logic, all Jewish-Americans are “guilty until proven innocent”. Hey? Until there is no more organized crime, why not hold ALL Italian-Americans culpable? And so it goes.

      • If you’re talking about criminal behavior then you’re talking about males 18-34 because that is the demographic predominantly represented in those crime stats and prisons regardless of race, socio-economics or region. And that is men again. And Bernie Madoff? Oh yeah, a dude. White collar criminals… also men by an overwhelming majority. Mafiosos… also mostly men , actually 100% men… women aren’t allowed in the Mob at all.

        Of all crimes committed world-wide, it is pretty much all men committing them, especially violent crimes, to the point that if women commit those same crimes it becomes headline news because it is so rare. Proceeding with a little extra caution around strange men that appear to be a little aggressive or shifty or manipulative is just good common sense for everybody, men or women.

        • Ooh yeah, you got me, “lela”, and like Hugo I am just wallowing in shame for my gender. My next task is to start telling my fellow miscreant males to please stop it, because as you know, I am sure they’ll listen, as no doubt, as they are already listening to their morally-superior-because-of-their-gender girlfriends and wives, who obviously are opposed to all this, right?

          FYI, the overwhelming of numbers of human beings who work in law enforcement, on all levels, from street cops to federal prosecutors, dedicated to preserving a safe and just society, and putting their lives on the line, happen to be the male of the species. The same applies to firefighters. Yes, there are women, too, involved in these professions, and they often attract a lot of publicity because of the novelty. And I would argue that proceeding with caution against ANYBODY being aggressive or shifty or manipulative is good common sense. Furthermore, I am grateful for my mostly fellow males in law enforcement — as well as firefighters and our US military — who are willing to sacrifice their lives so that women and the rest of us men can live peacefully.

          Just a thought, you know, next time Memorial Day rolls around.

          • I will never forget the last time there was a “take back the night” rally at my former college town. One of the speakers got up and screamed, that in case you are sexually assaulted, “DON’T GO TO THE POLICE!”, despite the fact that there are female officers prepared to attend to women victims. According to this speaker, the police represent the oppressive patriarchy, so don’t talk to them in case one is raped. She didn’t offer any alternatives. You wonder why a great many women in America still resist feminism and its tenets?

          • On memorial day they will be called anything but men.

        • Tom Brechlin says:

          Lela, What do you mean ” regardless of race, socio-economics or region?” Is that your way of trying to be PC? and you forget to mention your sweet Martha Stewart? How about Heather Rosenberg already had been busted six times when she was charged with stealing almost $34,000 from her Massachusetts employer. ” Or “Mary Dodge is an Associate Professor with the Graduate School of Public Affairs at the University of Colorado at Denver & Health Sciences Center” In fact there is a book out “Women and White Collar Crime” This book explores a neglected topic in criminology—women and white-collar crime. Taking a case study approach, it examines how women and crime has changed and why women have become more involved in corporate, political, and professional offenses.

          Tom B

  85. There’s a lot I could pick apart in your response, but for now, one question – ‘trendy’ for women to claim they’ve been assaulted? Really? Do you think there’s some kind of underground movement of women encouraging each other to accuse innocent men?

    And on another note … you know that most sexual assaults aren’t reported? A big reason being the sense of social shame associated with being assaulted (unfortunately due to victim blaming). It is extremely unlikely that someone would bring that on themselves willingly.

    Finally please remember that being a feminist (definition = equality for BOTH sexes) does not mean you are a misandrist.

    • Tom Brechlin says:

      I have to LOL about the “equality for men and women. When did women start signing up for selective service. May want to look at the stats on who gets custody of the kids in divorces. May want to look into how many shelters there are for battered men …. Uhhh, NONE. You’re right, there are rapes that are unreported, many of the abuses toward men go unreported. When the feminist movement wants to truly make the playing field level, let me know but until then, I encourage all men to be keep a watchful eye. Don’t have to go too far to find out what’s happening ….

      In a nine-year study of 109 rapes reported to the police in a Midwestern city, Purdue sociologist Eugene J. Kanin reported that in 41% of the cases the complainants eventually admitted that no rape had occurred. In a follow-up study of rape claims filed over a three-year period at two large Midwestern universities, Kanin found that of 64 rape cases, 50% turned out to be false. Among the false charges, 53% of the women admitted they filed the false claim as an alibi. Kanin, EJ, “An alarming national trend: False rape allegations,” Archives of Sexual Behavior, Vol. 23, No. 1, 1994. Kanin was once well known and lauded by the feminist movement for his groundbreaking research on male sexual aggression. But His studies on false rape accusations received very little attention

      • From the very next paragraph of that wikipedia entry on false allegations: “Kanin’s 1994 article on false allegations is a provocative opinion piece, but it is not a scientific study of the issue of false reporting of rape. It certainly should never be used to assert a scientific foundation for the frequency of false allegations. ”

        Don’t propagate propaganda.

        • Tom Brechlin says:

          Not an article, It was a NINE YEAR STUDY. No surprise that you don’t want to dismiss the truth. It’s the feminist way. Why is it so hard to believe that women are not perfect angels, that there are many women out there that can’t be trusted, as there are plenty of men. It’s the feminist way to “think” that when we show men being harmed that it’s in some way taking against women that are harmed. People have been pushing for VAWA to be changed so that it would also protect men. Note that I said “ALSO”. But the feminists are fighting against it. Why?

          It won’t be until your brother, uncle, nephew or even your father is accused of an act that they didnn’t commit, that perhaps you’ll see what’s happening.

          What good does it do to not address false accusations? Why are you so scared of the truth getting out to the people. As this string started it was about why women feel the way they do, but it’s not okay to educate men as to the potential pit falls in their relationships with women?

          It wouldn’t change the fact that women are raped.

          Tom B

          • Nope. It wasn’t a study. It was an article, published in 1994. It was immediately dismissed due to its blatant bias, unreliable data and unscientific approach. Basically, his position is that women, as a gender, are naturally liars due to their inferior intellectual abilities, masochistic nature and pre-disposition to mental illness. So all accusations made by women should be suspect.

            He went to a small town where the police department routinely dismissed rape allegations and subjected women who said they were raped to polygraph tests before an investigation into the alleged rape would even be conducted. Not surprisingly, they had an astronomically high rate of reporting false accusations of rape (up to 70% per year) in their statistics. He reviewed the police departments’ own findings with the aim of justifying that police department’s standard routine of not believing women who said they were raped. That 41% figure is simply exactly what that police department themselves reported in the nine years he “reviewed” for his article. That department reported that 45 of 109 reported rapes to be false. He didn’t conduct any studies, do any investigations or look at anything but what that police department had written in its files. He just took their numbers and wrote an article.

            But don’t take my word for it. Here’s a direct quote from the opening of the article: “However, in the 20th century,

            medical jurisprudence saw a new development that

            enabled false allegations to be viewed as a singular

            instance of gender-related lying, something quite different

            in nature from the false accusations of robbery or burglary

            that were made by men. In short, false rape accusations

            became a reflection of a unique condition of women, not

            unlike that of kleptomania (Abelson, 1989). This new

            development was the masochistic nature of woman

            doctrine, a perspective that assumed women had a

            subconscious desire for rape, as evidenced by their rape

            fantasies (Freud, 1933; Deutsch, 1944; Horney, 1933),

            and that neurotic individuals would convert their fantasies

            into actual beliefs and memory falsification (for an

            extensive and critical treatment of this perspective, see

            Edwards, 1981, 1983; Kanin, 1982; Bessmer, 1984). In

            addition, some influential medical figures adopted the

            position that false rape allegations were widespread

            (Menninger, 1933; Guttmacher and Weihofen, 1952).

            Many legal scholars enthusiastically endorsed this medical

            position (Wigmore, 1940; Juliver, 1960; Comment, 1973;

            Hibey, 1973) and commonly recommended that rape

            complainants be routinely subjected to psychiatric

            examination in order to determine their truthfulness

            (Guttmacher and Weihofen, 1952; Sherwin, 1973;

            Comment, 1973).”

            The whole thing is pretty shocking. From a purely scientific and academic viewpoint, the ridiculous number of times he cites himself as a source (especially his “report’ where he found that 100% of rape accusations are false, yep 100%. He in complete seriousness wrote up a report claiming that all rape accuasations are false and then went on and cited it as a source over and over in his articles. Sort of like saying the moon is made of cheese and I can prove it because I wrote in an article 10 years ago that the moon is in fact made of cheese, thus leading experts say the moon is made of cheese.) is pretty shocking.

            I know certain people are married to this 41% number as a fact with a capital F and won’t recognize any criticism of it or of Kanin. However, you don’t have to believe me. If you think Kanin is such a vessel of truth then believe him when he says: “Certainly, our intent is not to suggest that the 41% incidence found here be

            extrapolated to other populations, particularly in light of our
            ignorance regarding the structural variables that might be
            influencing such behavior and which could be responsible
            for wide variations among cities. But a far greater obstacle
            to obtaining “true” incidence figures, especially for larger
            cities, would be the extraordinary variations in police
            agency policies (see Comment, 1968; Newsweek, 1983;
            Pepinsky and Jesilow, 1984); variations so diverse, in fact,
            that some police agencies cannot find a single rape
            complaint with merit, while others cannot find a single rape
            complaint without merit. Similarly, some police agencies
            report all of their unfounded rape cases to be due to false
            allegation, while other agencies report none of their
            unfounded declarations to be based on false allegation (Kanin, 1985). ”

            Most scientifically vetted studies find the rate of false accusations to be 2-6%. While some other studies vary a few points up or down either side of that range, from .25% to 8%.

            • Tom Brechlin says:

              I still have to LOL. Even using your figures of as much as 6%. you’re looking at over 5000 men a yearwho have had their lives turned into hell for false accusations. So soon we forget the Duke lacross team members? I guess that’s not eneough, right? What happen to the “level playing field?” When it affects men, I guess it doesn’t matter? God forbit one of your male family members are falsley accused … I guess you would change your tune then … then again maybe not. Canada has got some interesting studies

              The “level playing field” keeps popping into my mind. In Poughkeepsie a female teacher attacked another female teacher with a screw driver. The teacher stuck a screw driver in the other teachers head. Of course that BAD man, a student, football player stepped in and managed to get the screw driver away from the teacher. The FEMALE assaulting teacher, Ricketts, is facing charges of first-degree attempted assault. Attempted ASSAULT?? Yeah, it’s a level playing field.

            • Yes, scientifically and academically vetted statistical evidence crumble before your anecdotal evidence.

              Funny isn’t it that MRSs make such a big fuss about “Men get raped too! Women are rapists too!” But then when it comes to their other big stink about “false accusations” suddenly, that is just innocent men getting their lives ruined by evil women?

              The stats for false rape accusations are on par with false accusations for all crimes. Unbiased law enforcement agencies consider it a non-issue in criminal investigations, as they do with reports of all other crime.

              It troubles me, though, Tom, that you seem to be suggesting that because a small percentage of people are accused of crimes they didn’t commit that the millions of people who have been victims of these crimes should have to endure the further trauma of having society and law enforcement not believe them when they are brave enough to come forth and speak up.

            • Tom Brechlin says:

              Being married for 36 years and having an adult daughter, I have and will continue to support victims when they have been harmed. All this started when it was pointed out that women do and should look at all males as potential rapists.

              I come from a generation that sleeping around was considered promiscuous. It’s now become an American pass time. Nonetheless, all I’m asking for is that the playing field be leveled for men and women, male and female.

              BTW, 35 years ago, my wife was attacked on an elevator of the apartment building we were living in Chicago. And 35 years ago, my 5′ wife knew what to do. I’m sure the guy still has the scars on his face from her finger nails let alone still speaking an octave higher then his normal voice.

              Speaking of which, time to get the little women up and head to my daughters for Christmas morning. Merry Christmas to you Lela, it’s been nice.

            • Interesting…I hope you argue as stridently for the use of scientifically valid rape reporting data from feminists, and against the statistics and studies they commonly use and refer to in support of their argument for rape culture — statistics which have regularly been pointed out as using unreliable data gathered using an unscientific approach that is blatantly biased.

    • J.G. te Molder says:

      Shame and victim-blaming? BWAHAHAHAHA! Getting shamed and victim-blamed is only a penchant for male victims of countless assaults.

      And you’re right, there is no underground movement of women encouraging false accusations; it’s above ground. It is there in plain sight; it is feminism and all the laws and rules of conduct they’ve gotten enacted. Rape-shield laws, and nobody ever holding a woman accountable for a false accusation. No woman has ever gone to jail for falsely accusing a man of rape or abusive; in fact, lawyers advise it to women as a viable tactic to get more money; because they will never be punished if they’re found out.

      It is tacit and outright encouragement to claim abuse by an entire society. In fact, in the UK they took it further; in the UK a 10,000 dollar, several thousand pounds, reward has been instituted for accusing a man of rape. Yes, ACCUSING. Not getting a successful conviction, not delivering evidence or proof, not testifying to get that conviction: accusing. “He raped me.” “Here’s ten thousand bucks ma’am.” And do they go to jail when it is proven to be false; hell, do they at least have to hand the money back? No. And so the politicians wondered; how come do we have this sharp rise in rape accusations, but no increase in convictions. Because they gave a 10,000 dollar monetary encouragement to (falsely) accuse a man.

      • ” in the UK a 10,000 dollar, several thousand pounds, reward has been instituted for accusing a man of rape.” That’s straight-up not the least bit true. You can’t just make-up outlandish propaganda. Prove it or stop posting it. Provide one citation from a reliable, verifiable, unbiased source.

        And secondly, false reporting of a crime (any crime, including rape) is a crime in itself. Law enforcement DO charge offenders. You’re not seeing millions of people in jail for “crying rape” because “crying rape” it doesn’t happen nearly as much as Lankin claimed in his 1994 article.

        I really do not understand the point of spreading dangerous propaganda. It doesn’t help men. It doesn’t help women. It doesn’t help PEOPLE at all.

        • It is true that in UK a victim of rape will be compensated out of state funds up to GBP 11.000,- and this is about USD 17000.
          Under certain circumstances this compensation might be cut.

          http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7555299.stm
          ——————————-
          On the other side, a victim of false rape allegation is not eligible for compensation.
          This is because only rape, but not false rape allegation is considered to be a violent crime.
          Even in case the victim and his family is suffering considerably…

          http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/5355743/False-rape-claim-victim-wins-landmark-compensation-ruling.html

          —————————-

          MRAs want this legal situation to be changed.

          A false rape allegation, deliberately, solely done out of the bad mood of a malicious woman should be considered as a felony.

        • lela says:
          December 26, 2011 at 12:27 pm
          ….. false reporting of a crime (any crime, including rape) is a crime in itself.
          ….. “crying rape” it doesn’t happen nearly as much

          ——————————————–

          The problem is however not much is happen in case of a false rape allegation to the false accuser.

          Many false accusers keep their anonymity for life, and are sentenced to some hours of community service and a few weeks in jail. Many cases are never prosecuted at all.

          http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1048754/Binge-drinking-mother-jailed-crying-rape-devout-Muslim-taxi-driver.html

          and this case is especially shameful, but who cares about a victim of a false rape allegation?

          http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-452350/How-taxi-drivers-life-ruined-teen-cried-rape.html

          It is NOT true that false rape allegations are so rare, as MRAs collected plenty of such cases with references wordwide in the past.

          It is ridiculous and dangerously wrong to argue false rape allegations do not happen many times.

          If such a serious crime is frequent or rare, what does this matter? It is still a crime and the criminal should be punished.

          • I can quote anecdotal evidence too! But I won’t and certainly not from a sensationalist tabloid with a long history of committing libel.

            Anecdotal evidence is meaningless.

            And especially in this discussion. If your point is that you don’t want people painting all men with a broad stroke for the actions of the men who rape women then it is rather hypocritical to keep bringing up anecdotal evidence of a few bad women in order to paint all women with a broad stroke. You may think you’re making one point but you’re actually making another, aren’t you?

            • Emma

              I agree wholeheartedly that the Daily Mail, UK news paper, is not the most suitable source for reputable news. However, as they are in need to advertising revenue they are one of the Few Britain based newspapers which do not limit access on a Global Scale via the net to content. It’s all about running the numbers and revenue streams.

              Far higher quality news outlets such as the Times, Telegraph, Independent, Guardian – The Main UK Broadsheet newspapers also covered the story, but in a far more subtle manner, discussing the issues and not the named parties . However, due to the way Search engines such as Google crawl the net and then present results based up page geographical location and Google user geographical location, biases are created.

              There has been the same issue here on GMP with such things as reports of Child Sexual Abuse such as “Children talking to ChildLine about sexual abuse November 2009”. The findings on that reports were discussed widely in the UK media, but Google tends to only report the Daily Mail due to Geographical biases, especially to those accessing the net from the USA .

              Such biases have been corrected here on GMP to allow debate and correction of error – including links to the original sources. That allows debate and even correction of error. I am glad to see that some have found such corrections helpful – and that the location of Source Data and report has also been helpful in promoting Good Faith, study and debate.

              Reliance on just news media for evidence is highly misleading for both sides of a debate. One also has to understand such things as legal process in different countries, and in the UK that is three different legal systems between England & Wales, Scotland and then Northern Ireland. There some some subtle and not so subtle differences which cause differences in due process as well as media coverage. The Daily Mail whilst providing supposed national coverage does have a bias which is London centric.

              On the other hand, The Daily Mail is the flagship of one of the largest networks of local and regional newspapers, with many small local news gathering teams. This does provide some value as local news stories covered in local courts outside of London will often be picked up and published by the Daily Mail first, and then be picked up and debated in the Main Media. Even the Low Brow daily mail does have some value when it’s place in UK media and news is understood.

            • J.G. te Molder says:

              You completely missed the point, didn’t you?

              :sighs:

              News flash, the post is NOT about women making false accusations, but about the system that rewards them, makes it easy to get away with it, and even has things built in that makes it much easier to get convictions, and incredibly difficult to to expose the falsehoods and the person telling them; and allows women to get away with it unpunished when they’re found out.

            • You’ve got to be kidding me. I’ve never met or heard of a woman who found it easy to report a rape, let alone being rewarded for it. Actually, most the women I know haven’t even reported it at all because of the social stigma attached to being raped, especially in regards to date rape rather than stranger rape. How real cases get thrown out due to it being incredibly difficult to prosecute and then the fact that they just couldn’t supply enough evidence, or that the opposing attorney pegged them as a big enough slut, that their case gets lumped in with the very small percentage of actual false allegations. You’re just deciding that these things are easy, probably from listening to other trolls, and stating it as fact. You obviously don’t know very many women, or not very well. I doubt any woman you know would be comfortable sharing her story with you due to you wanting to jump to the aid of the man she’s “probably falsely accusing,” so instead of understanding how it really is, you’re going to keep finding ways to excuse the rapist and villainize the victim. I hope you come to your senses

              You fail to understand the system that makes it easier for men to rape and to be rewarded for it.

            • J.G. te Molder says:

              Yes, because there is no such thing as rape-shield laws that mean a woman never has to face the man she accused and his lawyer…

              Oh, wait, yes there are!

              And it isn’t like feminism through continued propaganda and meaningful help from tv shows haven’t waged a 50-year war on the very notion of society’s stigma, so that it only remains with several extreme right-wing nutcases…

              Oh, wait, yes it did!

            • Tom Brechlin says:

              How many women do you know that have been raped? I can only presume work in a field where you encounter many. And who is placing a stigma on these women …. other women? I can only speak for myself, but if I were to encounter a women who was raped, I can assure you that there is no stigma attached but only empathy for her situation. But isn’t that what the feminists don’t want, understanding empathetic men? No,m they want men to be seen as thugs and perps.

              Women want women to remain victims no matter what. Women (feminists) are not interested in seeing that men can be and are victoms as well. And that’s all I have been trying to get across. That men have a stigma that they are rapists unless they can prove differently.

        • J.G. te Molder says:

          The compensation scheme is here: http://www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/guidance/compensation-schemes/cica/am-i-eligible/Criminal%20Injuries%20Compensation%20Scheme%202008.pdf

          If you read carefully, you will find that an actual conviction and evidence is not necessary. Merely that the alleged crime is most likely to have occurred through basically a very informal pencil pusher decision.

          And you’re right, I was wrong, women who falsely accused men are punished. That’s whyCrystal Mangum the most famous false accuser, you know of the Duke Lacrosse-case, is in jail now, as shown here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/19/crystal-mangum-duke-lacro_n_850910.html. Wait, hold on, oh, no, she’s in jail awaiting the trial for her stabbing her latest boyfriend to death! Latest, you ask? Well, yes, a year earlier she set the apartment of her previous boyfriend on fire, with her children in it. Her daughter called the police. She got off by accusing the boyfriend of abuse. You know, the way she accused the Duke-Lacrosse players of rape because the boyfriend she had then realized she had had sex with someones other than him (it was a gang bang with other guys.) You know, the way she hurled multiple such accusations around in several cases even before the Duke-Lacross case – all proven to be false by the way. Yes, a sure show of how swiftly the justice system works on false allegations when you’re a woman.

          Or you know, the one false accuser that might just surpass Crystal Mangum in notoriety: Nafissatou Diallo. You know, Dominique Strauss Kahn? Yes, she’s in jail… oh, no wait, she’s completely free to press civil charges!

          Truly, magnificent shows of the courts at work punishing false accusers.

          • You’re talking about CICA? The Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority? CICA is a fund set up to aide victims of violent crime. ALL violent crime. http://www.justice.gov.uk/guidance/compensation-schemes/cica/am-i-eligible/index.htm Many countries, including the US, have similar compensation programs for victims of violent crime.

            CICA is not a reward system for women to falsely accuse innocent men of rape, which is what you stated. Defrauding CICA by making false allegations of any crime, including rape, is fraud. http://www.abneys.co.uk/AbuseLaw/cicaans.asp?id=46

            And why would you assume CICA is being abused by women falsely accusing men of rape? Why wouldn’t you then assume it is also being abused by victims of other violent crimes? And why just in the UK?

            • Tom Brechlin says:

              It’s not an assumption. We live in a society where men are automatically looked at as abusers, perpetrators and women are always the victims. This stream all started with women who see men as potential rapists without even getting to know them. So why would you think that these programs aren’t abused by women? Oh yeah, I forget, you’re the feminist who can’t see past her nose and see then men are behind the 8-ball. It’s okay to allow over 5000 men a year be falsely accused of rape (your stats). So who is to say that women don’t claim false damages?

            • It’s an assumption not supported by any facts.

              “your stats”
              Absolutely not my stats. I never mentioned 5000 anything in any of my posts. Please, be careful not to misrepresent what people say.

            • Tom Brechlin says:

              You and I were debating the % of men who are falsley accused of rape, You came up with the % and I connected them to “reported rape cases” using your low percentages. Yes, your stats that you posted on December 23rd. “Most scientifically vetted studies find the rate of false accusations to be 2-6%. While some other studies vary a few points up or down either side of that range, from .25% to 8%” and I took those stats with the 2010 rape crime rate = 5000 conservatively.

            • You and I were not debating. I pointed out the misinformation in your posts, misinformation that is not only potentially dangerous for people (all people, male or female, especially victims of crimes) but also channels the discussion away from the vetted facts which should be the heart of a healthy debate about such serious matters as violent crimes.

            • Tom Brechlin says:

              And although I still say the original numbers I reported are more accurate, I used YOUR numbers in my post. 5000 men a year for the past 10 years, you do the math. Tells ya how many men’s lives are ruined. This takes me back to the start of this thread and that is women are being trained to see all men as potential perpetrators.

  86. “…most assaults are never reported,” How is this statement even remotely justifiable? The mere fact that this number is an estimate makes verification impossible, The loche-ness monster has as much scientific credulity as these “unreported assaults!” So please, stop using unverifiable data as some lynch pin of your argument.

  87. Tom Brechlin

    Excellent stats! Great research! Thanks…

    By these standards, I think we can safely claim that 50% of unreported rapes are false! LOL

    • If two people are alone, how do you prove one of them touched the other? If there’s no semen (condoms! The rapist’s best friend!), no bruising, no blood, the victim has no proof of what happened. In criminal cases, the burden of proof falls to the prosecution. Why would a woman (or man) go through the shame and debasement of filing a report, telling a room full of strangers and (maybe) eventually a courtroom the most humiliating and painful experience of your life, just to have it overturned for lack of evidence? That’s why the vast majority of rape and sexual assaults go unreported. Mine included.

      • @Cassandra

        On the other side, women create false rape allegations, and how to prove you didn’t do it?

        http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1530174/Ex-wife-who-made-false-rape-claims-faces-prison.html

        In this case, it did not work out, as investigators do have experience how to discover, who is the liar and who is not….
        They should not check out the history of the ‘victim’, but they did it….

        ———————————————————-

        from the report:

        A woman who falsely cried rape against her former husband was facing jail yesterday after being convicted of perverting the course of justice.
        Sally Henderson, 40, a mother of two, described by the prosecution as a “wicked liar”, claimed Richard Cooke, 39, had repeatedly raped her during their year-long marriage.
        But police discovered her claims were almost identical to false allegations she had made five years earlier against a previous boyfriend, Mark Rowe, 42, Gloucester Crown Court heard….
        ———————————————————

  88. Cassandra
    Comment:
    “If two people are alone, how do you prove one of them touched the other? If there’s no semen (condoms! The rapist’s best friend!), no bruising, no blood, the victim has no proof of what happened. In criminal cases, the burden of proof falls to the prosecution. Why would a woman (or man) go through the shame and debasement of filing a report, telling a room full of strangers and (maybe) eventually a courtroom the most humiliating and painful experience of your life, just to have it overturned for lack of evidence? That’s why the vast majority of rape and sexual assaults go unreported. Mine included.”

    Aren’t these situations why women should be trained, and encouraged to fight back hard; to bite, yell, kick, and scream, to ensure that there is enough evidence to make a solid case? Moreover, isn’t this also why rape couselors abound? To encourage women to stand up for themselves? It’s not prosecuters are ever in a rush to get under the statute of limitation for sex crimes. Unfortunately, it is just as likely true that the report will turn out to be false. In fact, the latest numbers i’ve seen put the false reporting number to be between 30% and 50% depending on type of crime and other variables.

    Moreover, poilice are obligated to investigate all reports of sexual assault, molestation, and rape, regardless of their personal feelings in the matter. At this point, the mainstream of female media voices get behind the, accuser, while the the manosphere initially supports the accused. If both sides of the issue invetst support to both sides, than the system is working, not broken.

    But when women who are raped or assaulted refuse to come forward, They contibute to the systems failure. For example, if a seriel date rapist rapes a string of different women, all of whom refuse to report, for the same reasons you gave, then many more women are put at risk, while he goes free and unpunished. If any of the victims had initially stood up to accuse the rapist, then the police would have investigated him, and in all likihood would discover additional victims.

    Also, when any victim is unwilling to report, for any reason, it makes her story less beleivable. We have had too many examples of false charges being levelled more various and dispicable reasons. Simply put, if a “victim,” with all of those rape counselors and other advocates in her corner, still isn’t confident enough in her story to call out her attacker, then there is likely something she doesn’t want to admit. Usually, this is the rest of the story, which are the mitigating factors of the event. There has simply been far too much deceit and manipulation on both sides of this issue to give anyone the benefit of the doubt.

    • “Simply put, if a “victim,” with all of those rape counselors and other advocates in her corner, still isn’t confident enough in her story to call out her attacker, then there is likely something she doesn’t want to admit. Usually, this is the rest of the story, which are the mitigating factors of the event.”

      Wow, really? I explain to you why someone like me might not want to report a rape and you say that no, it’s that I have something to hide? Thanks for that, I had NO IDEA what my TRUE intentions were. I clearly needed a man to explain it for me. This might surprise you, but you don’t actually have better insight into people’s actions and feelings than they themselves do! Check your privilege.

  89. The biggest issue I have with all the drunk=rape equations, are the enthusiastic inebriates. This is when two people voluntarily agree to get drunk, and later, voluntarily hook-up. This sadly happens quite a bit. I will go out on a limb and say that most people make poor long-term decisions while in the drunken fog of inebriation! No big shock right? But according to many, even if she’s enthusiastic in the moment, and he is also in a diminished capacity, a, how is he to be sound enough of mind to decide that both of them, in their enthusiastic state, are wrong? It’s absurd. If she says and acts like she’s into it, they are both drunk, how is his inebriation mitigate all liability? This is clearly a double standard. If a man is legally responsible for his actions then so is she!

    • Legally, if they both met the legal definition of drunk, neither could legally consent. That would mean, technically, that they raped each other.

      • J.G. te Molder says:

        Technically, yes. Legally, he raped her. He’s a man, see, men rape, women don’t. Women are pathetic, childish, angelic victims, the man is the evil, raping demon.

      • If both are drunk, then technically whoever instigated the act in question was the one seeking consent from a person not legally capable of providing consent.

        • How do you define “instigated the act?” What if, however you personally define “instigated the act”, it was mutual?

          • Well, see, that is a problem when it comes to date rape, especially. Unless there is a clear aggressor, how can anyone prove person A or person B instigated whatever act is being objected to?

            Say a girl and a boy leave a frat party together stumbling drunk. They have intercourse. They wake up the next day and don’t remember much. But they both are horrified to discover that intercourse occurred and sex with a random stranger is out of character for both of them. Technically, they could both accuse the other of rape, right? But neither would have a very good case because how do you prove beyond a reasonable doubt what happened when you can’t remember much and you acted in a way that is out of character for you?

            Now most likely, neither would consider it rape but would instead consider it a really bad decision and decide to never get drunk at a party again. But say they both did consider it rape, they still probably wouldn’t say anything to anyone about it because of what rape culture says to both of them. For the girl, rape culture tells her that good girls don’t like sex so if she had it then she is already guilty and good girls don’t put themselves in situations where things like rape could happen so again she is “bad” and it tells her that if she had sex then she is a slut and therefore damaged goods so it is in her best interest not to say anything to anyone lest word gets around that she is a slut etc etc. And for the boy, rape culture tells him that men must always be the aggressor when it comes to sex, that they must always want it or there is something wrong with them, that if a girl took advantage of him he is less than a man etc etc. It’s not good for either of them. Plus, rape culture probably set up the miscommunications that lead to one or both of them doing something they didn’t want to do in the first place. Rape culture sets sex up as some twisted little game where you have to guess about what the other person is really thinking when it should be something people can speak about in clear terms so there is no confusion for anyone. Women like sex. Men like sex. People like to have sex with other people. It really shouldn’t be so shameful and unspeakable, you know?

            • There is no such thing as rape culture, unless there is also car theft, larceny, identity theft, shoplifting, and a culture for every other criminal act.

            • Please, define what you think rape culture means.

            • There is no such thing. Rape is a crime, as are many other things. Rape is considered a heinous crime, more heinouse than virtually anything else, save pedophilia.

            • Rape is a heinous crime. Rape culture exists.

              You asked questions so I assumed you were interested in having a discussion. There is no point in us just repeating over and over our opposition. So unless there is more to be said, let’s call it a night.

            • If rape culture exists so does car theft culture, and a culture for every other crime – including other heinous ones.

            • Tom Brechlin says:

              Wher
              Where does this culture start? A boy in Grant County, Wisconsin has been charged with sexual assault after getting caught playing “butt doctor” with a 5-year-old girl and her brother last fall. The girl said the boy had only touched her on the outside. The girl’s mother, however, suspected that the boy had put his finger in the girl’s anus. Read more: http://www.care2.com/causes/6-year-old-charged-with-sexual-assault-for-playing-doctor. Chiquita Lockett, a North Carolina mom, says her 9-year-old son Emanyea has been suspended from school after calling a teacher “cute.” Wait, it gets worse. The principal of Brookside Elementary in Gastonia is calling the incident a form of “sexual harassment.”

              Tell me men are not behind the 8-ball. Men/boys bad, women victims.

              How about this one?

            • Except that when someone alleges car theft, the de facto commentary is not, “Two to six percent of car theft accusations are false; therefore we should not rush to side with the accuser” (despite the facts that rates of false accusation are fairly consistent across crime categories). We would not immediately suggest the victim may have wanted the car taken or ask why they didn’t put up more of a struggle against the perpetrator if they really didn’t want the car taken. It is less shameful to come forward as a victim of theft and the crime itself is easier to prove; victims of auto theft simply do not experience the same cultural forces as victims of rape.

            • What is your evidence that “the de facto commentary” of the police or other authorities is that “Two to six percent of rape accusations are false?”
              O
              What would the police say to a car theft victim who left the car unlocked? And valuables visible? And the car running? Would they admonish them to not do that anymore? Would they tell then that they attracted car thieves and should have known better?

              How well do people do on their court of public opinion who have their late model cars stolen after leaving it running in a neighborhood known for theft? Admiration? Sympathy? Or criticized and “shamed?”

            • Really, Eric M? So the only way for you to compare rape to car theft, is for the car theft victim to have done all the things that they “should have known better” than to do? Because the implication is that rape victims “should have known better” and are at fault for the crime. That’s victim blaming at its most basic.

              Most rapes do not occur because someone is stupid and goes wandering around “asking for it” in a neighborhood known for rape. Show me vetted stats that say rape victims get raped because “ask for it” with stupid, reckless behavior. Or stop perpetuating dangerous myths.

              Crime assessments say most rapes occur in a by a person known by the victim and in a home where the victim has a reasonable expectation for trust and safety. So your car theft anaology really should be more along the lines of the stolen car was locked in a locked garage of a home in a good neighborhood with the anti-theft device engaged and the keys secured in the locked, alarm-system-engaged house.

        • J.G. te Molder says:

          Anyone that is unable to provide informed consent is also unable instigate any informed action. So you must either say that they are both able to do so, whether through demanding that they should know how much they can drink before that limit is reached, and informedly chose to drink beyond that limit, and thus they did not rape each other, or you must say that both are unable to give informed consent, and thus both are cannot be held accountable for their actions. End result: no one get punished either way.

          Of course, this comes entirely from common sense and a demand for equality under the law. The moment you say that one person must be judged differently than the other, be measured by different standards, you no longer have equality under the law.

          And considering reality, it means that women have privilege, while men have neither privilege nor rights, and is the one discriminated against and unequal.

  90. right! now see how silly that sounds?

  91. Hugo has left us, alas, and will have to seek another venue to showcase his gospel of shame and guilt. For myself, I will argue that while some women do commit sexual assault, women are by far the predominant victims of rape. However, contrary to what the militant wing of feminism preaches, the overwhelming majority of men are not inclined to rape, and furthermore, don’t think it is amusing either. Remember, ladies, all of us have mothers and grandmothers, and many of us have wives, girlfriends, platonic female friends, aunts, sisters, female cousins, daughters, and granddaughters. The notion, promulgated by militant feminists, that we are indifferent to, or amused by, rape is an ugly, emotionally inflammatory idea promulgated by individuals whom I judge to have serious issues. Bye, bye Hugo.

  92. It’s an understandable position for women to be weary… but at the same time, women seemingly constantly reward men for the exact type of behavior one would expect from predators, abusers, the “guilty” ones. One needs only to look at the frat/sorority scene (where it is most pronounced) to see that.

    • Suzana Alves says:

      How are women “rewarding” these men, and why are these men acting like predators and abusers in the first place? No type of reward, whatever you mean by it, can make it right and will turn someone into a jerk… if they are acting like that, it is because they ARE like that, not because some people will “reward” them.

  93. Wirblewind says:

    Toysoldier linked a great article that talks about rape culture and victim blaming- or rather the myth concerning them: http://theonlinecitizen.com/2011/12/slutwalk-manufacturing-myths-about-%E2%80%98myths%E2%80%99/

  94. Thank god, I’m gay and don’t have to deal with women!

    • Suzana Alves says:

      Nah, most gay men love women, lesbian or straight/bi.
      You are just another straight dude trying to shame women, ahaha!

  95. Author: lela
    Comment:
    “So the only way for you to compare rape to car theft, is for the car theft victim to have done all the things that they “should have known better” than to do? Because the implication is that rape victims “should have known better” and are at fault for the crime. That’s victim blaming at its most basic.

    Most rapes do not occur because someone is stupid and goes wandering around “asking for it” in a neighborhood known for rape. Show me vetted stats that say rape victims get raped because “ask for it” with stupid, reckless behavior. Or stop perpetuating dangerous myths.

    Crime assessments say most rapes occur in a by a person known by the victim and in a home where the victim has a reasonable expectation for trust and safety. So your car theft anaology really should be more along the lines of the stolen car was locked in a locked garage of a home in a good neighborhood with the anti-theft device engaged and the keys secured in the locked, alarm-system-engaged house.”

    I knew a family where I grew up, they liked taking their boat out on the lake during the summer. Their parents had always tried to model safe, responsible boating. Unfortunately, sometimes, people just want to party. And what’s a party without drinking? And who wants to ruin their tan by wearing a life vest? Well, at the end of a long day of drinking, partying, and tanning were through, they were getting ready to come back in. Now, all of these partiers being buzzed were not making the best decisions. The first was bringing the boat into the docks way to fast, The second, and much, much, worse, were seeing a boat ahead of them. Blindsiding the boat ahead of them, capsized their own boat, while crushing the other to pieces. The violence of the collision threw all 11 passengers of both boats clear of the wreckage. Nearly all suffering concussions as well as other moderate to severe injuries. It was noted later, by local officials, that all of the boaters who had been wearing life vests and not drinking were eventually saved. The five boaters who had not worn life vests and had been drinking died from drowning nearly instantly.

    So now, every summer, local law enforcement makes a big public awareness campaign about wearing life jackets and not drinking while boating. Would this be considered victim blaming? To suggest that if any of these five young women would have lived if they hadn’t been drinking/partying on the boat? Also, if they had been wearing life vests, they would have likely survived this crash, is this victim blaming? Or perhaps the assertion that “just having a good time,” in this context amounted to, “risky behavior,” is that victim blaming? It was even more tragic because, in this case, it could have been easily prevented. I can’t tell you how many tragedies i’ve heard that all begin with the phrase, “So I was at this party…” or, I was drinking, or I was stoned, and then…

    A clear and simple truth, is that human beings, men and women both, make poor decisions while drunk, high, and stoned. Getting drunk or high, or stoned, is at the very least increasing the risk of making a decision you regret, like embarassing pictures. At worst intoxication leads to injury, incarceration, and death. You cannot have your cake and eat it too. Voluntarily becoming intoxicating is deciding to increase the likelihood of all manor of unwanted outcomes. All people should accept responsibility for their own choices.

    Trying to reduce the number of rapes is !!!NOT!!! blaming the victim! Let me say that again for emphasis, Trying to reduce the number of rapes is !!!NOT!!! blaming the victim! According to FBI crime statistics, 30% of rapes are committed by a stranger, with 40% percent by acquaintance, and 30% by an “intimate”.

    Rapists do not respond to social pressure and clearly reject the law and the other persons rights. Rapists cannot be reformed, nor their behavior altered. Rapists, are bad men who prowl like sharks. Appetite and availability are the only mitigating factors for all predators. If there is even one women out their in the interwebs who is willing to take additional protective measures, than it is worth my comments.

    So what then is the point of all this awareness raising by victim advocates? You can’t shame non-rapists into being any less rapist, nor are we equiped to prevent rapists from raping. All we have are our laws, and our advice.

    I make this point because like most men, I’d rather fix the problem then wallow in my “victimhood!” There are definitely lots of risky behavior that is accossiated with being victimized. Using alcohol or drugs, attending clubs and parties where drugs and or alcohol is a feature and the other partiers are inebriated, stoned, or high, and of-course, being a member of a gang or party crew.

    The world is a risky and dangerous place. If you don’t beleive me, just look at nuture, or one of those discovery documentaries. There is a savage nature to this planet of ours. Even children come to understand it’s dangers early on. Why is it that feminsists all wish to counsel women to live in cavalier defiance of prudence? Life, health, and safety can all be snatched away from each of us at moments notice.

    • If drunk driving awareness programs focused on sober drivers keeping their cars well-maintained so they can better avoid getting injured by a drunk driver… rather than focusing on drunk people not drunk driving, then it would be victim blaming.

      Don’t drive drunk = Don’t rape
      Don’t get injured by a drunk driver = Don’t get raped

      See the difference?

      Now also just as another point which your post brings up and which rape culture glosses over, thus endangering all people: most rape victims are not drunk reckless women wandering around dangerous areas getting raped by strangers who were provoked by short shirts and promiscuous behavior. Most people who are raped, are raped by people they know and trust, in a place where they should be safe. And for most people that rape happens as a child. Should I repeat that for emphasis?

      These figures are from the CDC (http://www.cdc.gov/ViolencePrevention/pdf/SV-DataSheet-a.pdf):

      • 60.4% of female and 69.2% of male victims were first
      raped before age 18.
      • 25.5% of females were first raped before age 12, and
      34.9% were first raped between the ages of 12-17.
      • 41.0% of males were first raped before age 12, and
      27.9% were first raped between the ages of 12-17.
      • In the first rape experience of female victims, perpetra­
      tors were reported to be intimate partners (30.4%),
      family members (23.7%), and acquaintances (20%).
      • In the first rape experience of male victims, perpetrators
      were reported to be acquaintances (32.3%), family
      members (17.7%), friends (17.6%), and intimate
      partners (15.9%).

      So how is your public safety message of ‘don’t get drunk so you don’t get raped’ going to in any way help the largest percentage of rape victims? If your rape awareness program doesn’t actually address issues facing the largest percentage of rape victims… then it is time to stop buying into myths and refocus the message.

      Focusing on perpetrators is a much more effective public safety campaign. Educating teens and kids on positive sexual interactions (like talking to your partner about what your expectations and limits are, like not equating male promiscuity to manliness so boys feel pressured to ‘lose it’ asap and put themselves in risky situations, like not equating intercourse to love so young people think if they “love” someone they have to give into pressures for activities they aren’t ready for etc etc) and bringing sex out of the shadows of fear and shame (for example, boys shouldn’t be shamed for not having sex and girls shouldn’t be shamed for having sex, and no one should feel that they brought on activities they weren’t ready for and therefore ‘owe’ someone those activities), etc those are much more effective tools in reducing the number of rapes.

      • Tom Brechlin says:

        Let’s get something straight. Any sexual relations under the age of 18 is wrong. Consenting or not, it’s wrong. Teens are not emotionally mature enough to be able to make that choice. Your solution is “.talking to your partner about what your expectation s” We’ve become a permissive society and have turned sex into a recreational activity.
        We’ve been talking about education. It’s a joke because in my business, boys are not educated in this area. I work at a residential facility for make teens. In the past 13 years, I can’t count the number of times these boys have been sexually abused by older girls women. What’s sad is that these boys don’t even see themselves as being abused. To quote one teen I worked with “I bagged my first babe when I was 9 years old.” It was his 18 year old baby sitter. This boy was 16 when he was in treatment for drug abuse.
        This is the what we’re teaching boys? Most of the boys I work with are from single parent homes where moms are the head of the household. MANY of these boys know their mothers boyfriends as their so called role models.
        It’s funny how Hollywood sees smoking a cigarette as being bad on the silver screen but it’s nothing to show one night stands. Either remove the work “promiscuity” from the dictionary or let’s start calling a spade a spade.
        Let me give you a quick lesson into a formative adolescent brain. It’s called the “formative” years for a reason. As teens, we develop knowledge of pleasure through various activities in life. If ya didn’t know, the chemical is known as “dopamine.” Research shows that if an adolescent addict doesn’t replace his/her pleasures with using drugs with those without drug use, he/she will more then likely be an addict as an adult.
        In my 6 to 9 month program, we spend a lot of time working with these teens developing leisure activities without drug use. Many of them started using at ages as young as 7 years of age which means they had little to no childhood memories that didn’t include drug use. There are emotional ties to sex. Accordingly many of these teens that you would rather “educate” them as to how to have safe sex, reduce the risk of rape, are in fact being set up for problems later in life. Are you so foolish to not realize that the sexual culture that we live in is in direct correlation with the sexual addictions that exist today? That there isn’t a direct correlation with rape?
        Addict progress in their drug use. Many turn to crime such as robbery, armed robbery, drug sales, auto theft so as to get money to pay for their drugs. A kid that starts having sex at a young age will progress and ass their sexual addiction progresses, so will their ways to have sex. It’s how a formative mind works. This isn’t exclusive to boys, same applies to girls. Girls emotions when they are sexually active as a child equates sex with “love.”
        In 1960, when the word “promiscuity” meant something, the number of forced rape cases was 17,190. In 2010 the number of forced rape was 89,767. And by the way, the 5000 number that I mentioned in an earlier post was based upon “forcible” rape and did not include things like date rape.
        I would like to see the stats relating to rape that involves women who have active open sex lives and those who don’t.
        Maybe it’s time to start to pay attention to men and boys and allow them to the educational benefits. Let’s start educating our youth that sex is not a recreational activity. And STOP enabling them by educating them on “safe sex” and how to identify a potential perpetrator.

        • “And STOP enabling them by educating them on ‘safe sex’ and how to identify a potential perpetrator”.

          Yeah, right, Tom. Since “abstinence only” programs have proven to be such a spectacular success: http://www.openeducation.net/2009/01/05/abstinence-only-sex-education-statistics-final-nail-in-the-coffin/

          And refusing to teach safe sex, especially, will just do wonders for gay teenage males, for whom I am sure, ignorance is bliss.

          Actually, I am opposed to the forms of sex ed that focus only on “safe” pleasure, and the other extreme, sex ed that is, in fact, the total absence of sex ed apart from “don’t do it!”. A more sensible alternative should focus on what non-sexual needs are children and teens trying to meet through sex (unexpressed anger towards males or females, self-esteem, physical affection, peer acceptance, love), and make the children and teens both conscious of these needs, which they often think are merely sexual feelings, and how to have such needs met in a non-sexual manner.

        • J.G. te Molder says:

          In other countries, we do not consider teens to be completely pathetic and the age of consent is 16. In times gone by, if you didn’t have all the children you wanted in a marriage by the age of 15/16, there would be a damn good chance you did not get to raise your children to adulthood; which started at 12. Kids around ten were shipped off to a master craftsman to become his apprentice (or the father was the master) where they were taught a trade, and by the time they were 15, they were either a full-fledged partner in the business and expected to take over once the old master retired, or had left and started their own business somewhere else.

          And yet, these “teens”, and “children” were perfectly able to responsibly run a business like “adults” and raise their children to become responsible adults.

          This was not child abuse; it was simply the way the world worked. Without modern technology and medical science to make the world a far safer place, if you didn’t start your adult life by then, you would never have an adult life – well, except homeless and out in the streets, for men, girls probably still had prostitution to fall back on.

          The reason why our teens are not capable of responsible choices, is because we never taught them how to. We shield them from responsibility to a ridiculous extent, guarded, protected, “safe”. It’s telling that the countries that don’t have the ridiculous hangups about sex and nudity, where children are actually taught about it, and the consequences of certain sexual choices of sex, the amount of teen pregnancies and “relationships” between younger and older people are far less.

          In women, this is worse. Feminism teaches women that they can and should have everything they want. No, you cannot have everything you want. There’s only so much time in a day; not to mention the needs of other people to take into account. Sex positive feminists say that women should have the right to have sex with anyone they want, whenever they want. That sounds suspiciously like the right to rape to me, doesn’t it? The guy or girl doesn’t want to? Tough luck, it’s the woman’s desires that matter.

          Couple this with families catering to every whim of their girls, while shielding them from any and all consequences; and teaching them that men are expected to bleed for them, like here, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gekyg7yy4Dc or the written version here, http://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/systemic-gendered-violence/, divorce laws that heave a man’s hard work and money onto the woman when she decides she’s bored or he can’t continue deliver what she wants (Hulk Hogan’s wife who never the result is people, women more than men, acting like 6-year-olds without a sense of responsibility and never once considering their entitlements the childish bullshit it is.

          After all, feminists claim that a man (never a woman) a man not handing his money over to his spouse is Domestic Absue. Never mind what the woman asks it for, the financial situation of the couple their in or that the woman sits on her ass while the man works his butt off, never mind the economic crisis and future expenses that need to be paid; nope, a woman asks for money for new pointless clothes or an expensive hairdo, and the man says no, he’s abusing her. I wonder what would happen if one would claim a woman doing the same to the man it is also abuse?

          • Either you’re dense or you’re a troll. The right to have sex with whoever, whenever, is not about forcing a woman’s desire for sex on an unwilling man, it’s about being able to have sex with a willing man without being shamed for it. You have serious issues with women that I really hope you get checked out because none of the information you put forth is relevant or normal. It’s all, “Look at this one woman out of the entire population who did x which proves that all women do this.” You think it’s fun trolling, but you’re trolling yourself by making women who want to trust men, and believe that men can treat them with respect and have healthy, happy sexual relationships with them, feel that men just can’t get it, trusting men even less. So when your sex life suffers, you only have yourself and your actions to blame.

            • J.G. te Molder says:

              Oh, there we go, standard feminist shaming tactics: you have problems with women, you’re a misogynist! You won’t get laid if you continue to go against the feminist party line!

              No, sweetheart, I don’t problems with women, I have problems with feminists, regardless of their gender. And yes, feminists are not women, and women are not feminists.

              And about the not getting laid part: I don’t care! Pussy ain’t everything. Besides, I’m bisexual; if women don’t want me, I’ll enjoy the men across the street.

          • You have no clue what a feminist is and what feminists say! Cite your source where “feminists say not giving a woman money is abuse”

            Men (and women) can and do use money to control a partner that is dependent financially on that person. This is an abusive relationship, when money is used to control another.

        • You’ve obviously glossed over the social stigma attached to rape in previous years as opposed to now. As difficult as it is to be heard when you’ve been raped and to prosecute rapists now, it was even more difficult back then. Your statistics are from before advances in technology that make it easier to identify a rapist. They’re from when women experienced even more shame and blame than they do now. When men were allowed to rape their wives without consequence. Of course the number of reported rapes were lower, doesn’t mean the number of actual rapes was lower.

          Not to mention there are way more people now in general than there were in 1960.

          You’re doing your gender absolutely no favors with your attitudes. Men who talk like you actually make me trust men less.

          • J.G. te Molder says:

            So, one post you was about society’s stigma, the next post you write the stigma is gone, well, except a few tiny problem cases here and there.

            Oh, then there’s a post that has nothing to do with rapes, and you answer with bullshit about rapes!

            Also notice, that the links are to a woman explaining you the bullshit about systemic violence against women.

    • “Rapists do not respond to social pressure and clearly reject the law and the other persons rights. Rapists cannot be reformed, nor their behavior altered. Rapists, are bad men who prowl like sharks. Appetite and availability are the only mitigating factors for all predators….
      So what then is the point of all this awareness raising by victim advocates? You can’t shame non-rapists into being any less rapist, nor are we equiped to prevent rapists from raping.”
      None of that is true either.

      The reality is that many rapists think they are non-rapists.

      Repeatedly in anonymous surveys, people will say they have not committed rape but then go on to admit to committing acts which are legally defined as rape as long as the word “rape” is not used in the description (http://www2.binghamton.edu/counseling/documents/RAPE_FACT_SHEET1.pdf). This is exactly where awareness campaigns and social pressure are effective tools in reducing rape.

      Believing that rapists are “bad men who prowl like sharks” and that rape happens in bad neighborhoods etc perpetuate myths that rapists also believe.

      • Wow, Lela, so you believe that the type of man who would carry a knife or gun to use to frighten and sexually assault a woman can, in fact, be reformed. It is interesting to know that unlike the majority of men in this forum who have daughters and sisters, you’d be perfectly okay with such a guy dating your child or sibling. After all you did just assert that it is not true that a rapist cannot be reformed, nor their behavior altered.

        So I guess you are not only advocating just the for victims of rape.

        • While Lela tries to figure a response to what I just said, which I admit, will take some work, I read Dr. Lisak’s paper and found his claims to be both credible, yet dishonest-by-omission. Which brings me to a disturbing and impolitic point that few men or women in this forum, most of whom are likely white, college-educated, and middle-class, want to broach, and neither does Dr. Lisak, which is that the overwhelming majority of rapists, both “detectable” and “undetectable” come from poor and minority, especially African-American communities. And that points at what the real issues are when it comes to rape.

          I am particularly struck by this passage: “Undetected rapists have repeatedly been found to harbor chronic, underlying feelings of anger and hostility toward women. They typically feel easily slighted by women, and carry grudges against them.” Hey! Wait a minute. According to what Lela and what other women in this forum argue, as well as Hugo, rape is merely the unbridled expression of male lust, the man’s libido, shall we say, in its purest forum, and thus something that needs to be contained and restrained (and shamed). But the expert that Lela herself refers to is saying that the underlying cause of rape is not that guys in general just let their sexual lust overtake them, but that SOME guys are angry towards women, and thus rape is not merely about sexual pleasure, but in fact a form of aggression. Elsewhere he mentions that most rapists were physically abused as children. By whom I wonder? Particularly in that many also come from fatherless homes. Lisak also mentions “sexually violent subcultures”, but without the courage to cite the most obvious, that is, African-American rap music in which committing rape is virtually expected of urban black male youth as the price of peer acceptance.

          Anyhow, personally, I do not view rape as something that is innate to male sexuality anymore than I regard eating disorders (overeating in particular) as innate to the human appetite. Both rape and overeating are perversions, not fulfillments, of natural human instincts, resulting from psychological and/or physical injuries done to the individual in his or her formative years. The research certainly bears that out. One would think, therefore, that if the Lelas of this world genuinely wanted to prevent rape, they’d work at educating poor, and especially poor-minority, mothers to raise their sons with respect and love, so as not to make them predisposed to take their anger out on women as these boys become men. But don’t expect that to happen soon, largely because the Lelas of the world would rather run a guilt-and-shame trip on all men, even if such will do little to actually stop women from getting raped. But it sure makes Lela look like a heroine, and who can deny the lady her dreams of glory?

          • Women interested in preventing rape could also support efforts to make conscious and validate the anger that boys, who have been abused by their mothers, have. My idea would be something along the lines of counseling with male mentors, perhaps a group workshop where boys could come together in a safe space and share their anger, frustration, and grief.

            But my experience with militant feminists is that they oppose males of any age expressing ANY anger towards ANY women, no matter if said expression is non-violent, and no matter if it is thoroughly justified.

          • Tom Brechlin says:

            Great posts … like to ask, how do single moms educate their boys to respect women when these mothers have children without active dads in threir lives? What they teach them is ot’s okay to have4 sex, have kids and leave dad out of it.

            Do as I say not as I did???? Many of these mothers had kids when they themselves were teens. Many of them have kids from different fathers. Feminists don’t want men involved because they fear losing control.

            • Suzana Alves says:

              Tom, you are a monster. Always shaming single mom (and the single dads), women and gays.

              Single moms, most of them, do their best. Many (or most?) dads LEAVE the moms behind. And you can still respect someone even if they commited mistakes (not crimes). Even better, you can take the person for who they are and not transfer it to their whole gender/race/sexual orientation.
              You believe this women are having the babies alone, that men never took part on it? Their babies’s daddies are as much to “blame” for it. Many of these men have kids from different mothers. But we should not blame or shame, but educate.

  96. lela:
    “Repeatedly in anonymous surveys, people will say they have not committed rape but then go on to admit to committing acts which are legally defined as rape as long as the word “rape” is not used in the description (http://www2.binghamton.edu/counseling/documents/RAPE_FACT_SHEET1.pdf). This is exactly where awareness campaigns and social pressure are effective tools in reducing rape.”

    how dangerous and vile it is to lump all men into the same pile, this way! In addition, broadening the definition of rape is dangerous legally and morally. It clouds the issue to include typical male behavior that has nothing to do with rape or sexual assault.

    “Believing that rapists are “bad men who prowl like sharks” and that rape happens in bad neighborhoods etc perpetuate myths that rapists also believe.” it is sad and shameful and perhaps a little shadenfraude, the way you try to redefine all men as rapists this way. You clearly are dismissing the clinical, psychological, diagnostic, and rehabilitative work performed on rapists and sexual abusers of all stripes, specifically in regards to recitivism and resistance to all corrective protocols and intervention. Even castration has negligable effects on the rapists behavior. You are clearly guilty of perpetrating the lie that all men are rapists, which is disgusting but more importantly focuses law enforcement resources where they are not needed.

    Thanks for pointing out to me that I am a rapist though, I appreciate it. All of us really should be castrated, locked away, and then humanely euthanised! You should put me at the front of the list.

    Okay but lets also be more honest about this. If any of those other behaviors should be considered rape, then we should also consider it rape whenever a woman wears sexy clothes, teases, or leads a man on! Right! I am being sexually assaulted through my eyes! They need to pay for lying and manipulating me! right? If you want to call all men rapists, then I am going to call all women rapists too!

    congrats lela! you are a rapist!

    I agree with one of your points, rapists and molesters, both male and female are overwhelmingly the products of early childhood abuse, so ending the cycle of violence is critical. But sadly, this can only happen when victims speak out. It cannot happen when you continue to tar all men with the “rapist” label.

  97. Lela;
    On the ever widening definition of rape:

    “being pressured into sex,” “being talked into sex,” any other versions of not saying “no! Stop” without a weapon or actual threat of physical violence cannot be considered rape. If any adult woman does not have the will or moral character and integrity to stand up for herself and clearly articulate her boundaries, Then she isn’t strong enough to make her own sexual decisions. If you articulate the assertion that women are equal to men, and should be as free as men sexually, and should never suffer shame for sexual choices or decisions, then you must also accept that women accept all the consequences of their own choices.

    To assert that women should have freedom to act in their own interest, but penalize men for doing the same, then you are guilty of a nefarious hypocrisy. I refuse to treat women as children, as such beleive they are just as capable of asserting their own interests. We’ve seen this in politics and the home over the past fifty years especially. So how is it that such strong, powerful, self-reliant, and independent women aren’t strong enough to say no, clearly, when a man crosses one of her boundaries? Are we to take the idea of female weakness seriously in this world of Girl power and women’s rights, especially in light of womanhoods great strides in politics, business, and academy? How dare you treat women as such weak children! How dare you! Women are mature and civil, they are no fools, they are not weak! How dare you purport to suggest that a woman is incapable of standing up to any man if she wants to.

    If there is no violence or threat of violence, there is no rape. If a woman is unwilling to accept responsibility for asserting her own boundaries, then that’s her fault. He can’t be responsible for her silence especially if he is under the mistaken impression that she wants to have sex. You should be placing the onus on women to clearly articulate when they don’t want to have sex. If a woman behaves in a charming and receptive manner, and never objects at any step, and never acts in a way that suggests discomfort, how can he then later be thought to be guilty if she didn’t voice her objection? The simple reality then is that women are by nature cowards who refuse to accept responsibility for there own actions. This is why men should avoid interactions with women at all cost.

    So the question is, are men and women equal, or are they not?

    If typical male behaviors can be considered criminal, than so should female behaviors like flirting, teasing, wearing sexy, provocative, tight-fitting, revealing clothes, and generally being charming should also be considered sexual assault rape and harassment!

    So how equal do you wanna be? How equal do you beleive you are?

    • You’re misinterpreting what being talked into sex means. It means a woman did assert herself, did say no or at the very least express that she didn’t want to in other ways, and the man refuses to take no for an answer,. He manipulates her into feeling guilty for not wanting to, he says he’s going to break up with her, he tells her that she’s not normal, he tells her she’s a bitch, a prude, or otherwise verbally degrades her for her choices, he might even cry to play on her sympathies. Either that or he just keeps touching her, coaxing her, even though she said no, and she eventually can’t hold him off anymore. It’s even a common theme in men’s magazines that no means maybe, just keep trying to talk her into it, just keep kissing her and touching her, she really wants it.

      If men and women were currently on a level playing field you might have an argument, might, however, they are not. Even just the possibility that a man could get violent can be enough to make a woman cave in order to prevent violence or confrontation. Because men are generally physically stronger, they can’t ignore that unspoken power that they have as a non issue. You don’t need to tell a woman that you could just force her to have sex with you for her to know that.

      See, you can’t mistakenly believe that a woman wants to have sex unless you’re assuming that she wants to have sex without her express permission. So instead of blaming the victim for the rapist’s incorrect assumption, why not expect the man to ask for a clear yes or no, without any manipulative tactics attached? Is that really so much to ask? You’re trying to call women cowards who don’t want to accept responsibility for their actions while making dozens of excuses for why a man can’t just ask a woman’s permission and then accept it when she says no.

      As for that last paragraph, then I guess men should also be rapists for doing things like working out, wearing nice clothes, buying a woman a drink, showing off, and whatever else men do which might attract a woman. Stop trying to connect a to g.

      • J.G. te Molder says:

        Translation: Men are awesome, and women are pathetic, spineless, little children that must be protected from their own patheticness, and inability to stick to a position. Their choice to change their mind is not something that is her choice and she should take responsibility for her choice, no, she she’s just so totally pathetic that her choosing to change her mind much be seen as him raping her.

        After all, you never once said that when a woman doesn’t take a man’s no for an answer, while he’s say, writing an article on his computer and she keeps rubbing her body against his, whining and begging for sex, and he finally relents and let’s her on her lap, she’s the one who is equally raping him; so we must assume you are misogynist who thinks women are pathetic and need protection from themselves, while men need no such things. Making men either awesome, or evil demons.

        As opposed to “manipulation” I’m sure you are also advocating the banning all women’s methods of “manipulation”, right? So no more miniskirts, no push-up braws, no makeup, no dresses with cleavage, none of these sexual-attraction inducing contraption. After all, she she can simply ask in plain pants and no makeup and a cover shirt, “Do you want to have sex with me?” And a clear no or yes is all that is required from the men to send her packing or them having fun, right?

        • Suzana Alves says:

          Man, you are dumb and suck. Why so many American idiots like you? You make the rest of the world ashamed.

          There are different forms of manipulation; different aspects while in different types of relationships, conducts, etc.
          For the last paragraphe, the same goes. You can’t equate someone in a power place shaming and humiliating someone into sex with women wearing make-up or men working out and taking their shirst off at the club. Come on now, don’t make us even more ashamed and scared for humanity.

  98. Tom Brechlin
    Comment:
    “And although I still say the original numbers I reported are more accurate, I used YOUR numbers in my post. 5000 men a year for the past 10 years, you do the math. Tells ya how many men’s lives are ruined. This takes me back to the start of this thread and that is women are being trained to see all men as potential perpetrators” – well said Tom!

    Moreover, because of this legal and social landscape, Countless men have been pushed out of Education and many other industries that have regular contact with children which is having a deleterious effect on young men and boys as recent achievement statistics all bear out. We are condemning a whole generation of men to live their lives in shame and ignominy as the feminist, “all men are evil” mantra chants ever louder!

    As the rest of society buys into this meme to ever increasing degrees, we are establishing a male second class. But clearly, for any other group, ie race, this would be considered hate speech, but because it’s men, women are getting a free pass spreading this BS around.

    I for one, will not stand for it, the legal and social consequences are pernicious. Nor do I care to have my character continually assaulted through manipulative and deceptive use of statistics which clearly show, in reality that the overwhelming majority of men are not and never will be abusers or rapists in any measure!

  99. Am I the only who thinks that Hugo blurting something out as an angst-filled teenager and being responded to, and then decades later not having developed any deeper or more nuanced position on this particular subject is kind of pathetic?

  100. Rick S.
    Comment:
    ” “Having sex with someone who is intoxicated is LEGALLY rape”

    Holy cow, Migraine, that means that millions and millions of men and women have been raping each other for centuries.

    But in all seriousness, I am struck by Migraine’s refusal to distinguish between being passed-out drunk, and merely being tipsy. And it makes me wonder, which is truly worse: right-wing puritanism or left-wing puritanism.”

    i think the reason that women want the alcohol=rape standard is a little deceitful. They want to have the leverage over the bad boys they like to sleep with as the ultimate relationship ace in the hole. Everyone knows what her intentions were going into these encounters. It’s all part of her plan. Get into bed with a player, then if he doesn’t live up her expectations, or worse doesn’t call, and she feels all butt hurt about it for giving it up, she gets to play emotional unibomber with a rape accusation. It’s blackmail, or extortion, depending on the definition. She is baiting a trap with a cute little body, sexy dress, and that bottle of wine. Women don’t ever want to accept responsibility for their own actions. They figure that they should be able to “judge the performance,” with a guy and decide if it’s “rape,” after the fact based on how she feels about the encounter.

    I personally, do not want to be under any woman’s thumb that way. If I am out with a woman and she’s getting horny acting like she wants me to make a move, I simply tell her, “let’s wait till you sober up, you wouldn’t want to do something you regret later!” this nearly always causes no end to their frustration. Once in a while they get really ticked off, then I tell them, I just don’t want to be guilty of rape. This nearly always ends the date.

    I think all men should boycott all inebriated women for a month, just to see what kind of reaction we can provoke. Though I don’t think this idea will catch on. I really do think that if women start to pick up on the fact that they can’t get their rocks off without changing some asinine laws, they will get really motivated to change em. Either way whatever strategy they adopt, it requires that we play along. I for one refuse.

  101. Jess
    Yeah, I see this all the time. Men who don’t have much success with women for whatever reason deciding that women are evil and taking it out on them in the form of anti-feminism. They express sentiments which make it sound like they actually hate women and have no respect for them. They state all sorts of ridiculous “facts,” only further alienating women from men in general, making us feel like men cannot understand these issues so there isn’t hop for them. And then they call themselves good guys and wonder why they aren’t having success with women.

    They’re also normally expecting women who are “out of their league” to date them rather than acknowledging the women who are attracted to them, but aren’t hot enough for them. They romanticize the fantasy of the super model who wants an overweight, unkempt guy who loves video games instead of going for an overweight, unkempt girl who loves video games. How dare a woman seek out a man who takes care of himself and has similar interests when she takes cafe of herself. They’re all just evil!

    Anyways, I’m going off on a tangent, but I find the comments on this article to be frightening. The attitudes of most of these men don’t make me want to trust men any more than I already do, and back up my feelings about men who feel entitled to sex with women with or without her consent. I don’t get what they’re trying to do here, it seems they’re only hurting themselves.

    Jess
    “Yeah, I see this all the time. Men who don’t have much success with women for whatever reason deciding that women are evil and taking it out on them in the form of anti-feminism. They express sentiments which make it sound like they actually hate women and have no respect for them. They state all sorts of ridiculous “facts,” only further alienating women from men in general, making us feel like men cannot understand these issues so there isn’t hop for them. And then they call themselves good guys and wonder why they aren’t having success with women.”

    1) The irony of complaining about men casting women and more precisely, feminism in a negative light on a blog post saying, “All men are GUILTY until proven innocent?”

    2) I am not sure why any man’s relative success or failure with women has any relevance to this argument? Should we discount the opinions of fat and unattractive women too? Even if every man who posted on this site had low success rates with women they pursue, I fail to understand how that’s even relevant to the case, unless it’s just a cheap shot intended at intimidating him. It seems like you are not above trying to use public humiliation, intimidation, belittlement, dismissmal, and shame to make your point. So exactly what exactly am I missing or not getting about this point.

    3) There is apparant in your statements that you equate your feelings with some kind of morality, and that offending or hurting your feelings is equivalent to some form of evil. Human emotions are fickle and ephemoral at best, pernicious evil at worse. We have devoted the developement of a system of laws for the governance of western society for this very reasons. Passions run high, and clear thinking reason often gives way to our baser instincts.

    “They’re also normally expecting women who are “out of their league” to date them rather than acknowledging the women who are attracted to them, but aren’t hot enough for them. They romanticize the fantasy of the super model who wants an overweight, unkempt guy who loves video games instead of going for an overweight, unkempt girl who loves video games. How dare a woman seek out a man who takes care of himself and has similar interests when she takes cafe of herself. They’re all just evil!”

    4) again, not sure exactly what the point of this statement is. Though it sounds a lot like “BOYZ HAVE COOTIES, THEY’RE sOOO ICKY AND GROSS” Maybe I missed something.

    “Anyways, I’m going off on a tangent, but I find the comments on this article to be frightening. The attitudes of most of these men don’t make me want to trust men any more than I already do, and back up my feelings about men who feel entitled to sex with women with or without her consent. I don’t get what they’re trying to do here, it seems they’re only hurting themselves.”

    5) Owning your personal prejudice… At least you are able to admit that these are your own feelings. If you want to assume all men want to rape you, that most of us have evil intentions and are looking for any opportunity to take advantage of you, and that we’re all more or less the same, more power to yah. It’s not my job to convince you otherwise. Your bigotry is your business. As long as you don’t use this to attempt to justify bad law. Personally I don’t really care whether or not you ever learn to trust men, it doesn’t effect me in the least. I am more than satisfied with my friends and extended family, and all the love and awkward sex I receive from “homely women” that are “in my league!” The best way to learn to start trusting men is to stop swallowing everything your feminist sisters feed you. I could care less if you never leave your self afflicted isolation to the land of torment and fear.

    Jess:
    “You’re misinterpreting what being talked into sex means. It means a woman did assert herself, did say no or at the very least express that she didn’t want to in other ways, and the man refuses to take no for an answer,. He manipulates her into feeling guilty for not wanting to, he says he’s going to break up with her, he tells her that she’s not normal, he tells her she’s a bitch, a prude, or otherwise verbally degrades her for her choices, he might even cry to play on her sympathies. Either that or he just keeps touching her, coaxing her, even though she said no, and she eventually can’t hold him off anymore. It’s even a common theme in men’s magazines that no means maybe, just keep trying to talk her into it, just keep kissing her and touching her, she really wants it.”

    6) Apparrantly I have been misinformed. I have been listening to the, “don’t need men, equal to men, strong as a man, capable as a man,” meme for most of my life, so it seems a bit disengenuine to suggest that women who can accomplish so much, as supposedly so weak when it comes to men. I really do beleive women are well and truly my equal. So I guess I am really shocked to find out that all of you really are this weak? Shocked! That you can’t (or won’t) even stand up for yourelf? That you don’t know how or worse, don’t beleive that you’re supposed to? Sorry, I have been under the impression that woman are the the equals of men, better than, in many respects? What is so broken in women, that they can’t assert themselves when exposed to the child-ish forms of manipulation that you are describing. This would be a truly sad day for feminism if that’s the case. Unless this is just another attempt at emotional manipulation by women on men to accomplish some end through deceitful means. I’ll let you call it; either women are so weak that they cannot hope to ever call themselves equal to men, or, more likely, you accept that this is pure propaganda and emotional manipulation for political ends. A third option does exist. Women hate themselves for choices they make and don’t want to accept responsibility for them.

    7) I as a man have had to learn to stand up to and assert myself in situations where I am exposed to all of the above situations and more. If I can do it? Why can’t you? Why should I feel sorry for you if you agreed to do something you didn’t want to do? If you didn’t try to run away, if you didn’t yell and scream no!? If you didn’t pull out your cell and dial 911!? How is it his fault?! This is not rape. Women in and out of relationships use these same negotionating tactics all the time, though not always for sex. Women use this behavior and worse to one another.

    “If men and women were currently on a level playing field you might have an argument, might, however, they are not. Even just the possibility that a man could get violent can be enough to make a woman cave in order to prevent violence or confrontation. Because men are generally physically stronger, they can’t ignore that unspoken power that they have as a non issue. You don’t need to tell a woman that you could just force her to have sex with you for her to know that.”

    8) We can acknowledge this, but we should also put it into context. We must also acknowledge that any woman may also have a man arrested for touching her anywhere on her body, and call it assault or sexual assault or even battery. In reality, she only needs to, “claim,” he’s touched her inappropriately for him to be arrested. Regardless of the fact that eventually the investigation will likely prove his innocence, he will still have been arrested, booked, and spend severa nights to months in jail, not to mention the stigma he will face as a sexual offender. She can also have a man arrested for rape or attempted rape with nothing but her own words. That’s a hell of a lot of power to intimidate men. Even worse, a woman can cut off a man’s penis then throw it in a field, or grind it up in a garbage disposable and be universally praised by women. So I think it is women whom should be considered guilty until proven innocent, no? Oh, right, just isolated insidents? Sure…

    9) More context, a woman is more likely to get any form of cancer, die of heart disease, and die of a car accident than she is to be raped or sexually assaulted.

    “…why not expect the man to ask for a clear yes or no, without any manipulative tactics attached? Is that really so much to ask? You’re trying to call women cowards wdon’t want to accept responsibility for their actions while making dozens of excuses for why a man can’t just ask a woman’s permission and then accept it when she says no.”

    10) Rape is different than persuasion. Rape is different than seduction. Rape is ugly, evil, and violent which is taking by force and then destoying that which you will not give or surrender willingly, or freely. Persuation is an important tool development in civilized societies to enable individuals and groups the advantages and disadvantages of an idea or point of view. Persuasion has been effectively used for good and ill by men and women alike throughout history. Their is nothing evil or even noxious about seduction or persuasion. How dare you insinuate that these three uttley and completely distinctive things are somehow equivalent when it comes to sex.

    11) If a woman says no, then changes her mind, she can’t accuse him of raping her.

    12) why not expect that a woman is more than capable of making decisions as an adult and accepting responsibility for them and doesn’t need to be second guessed by other women? Why shouldn’t all men and women be free to negotiate their approach to sex on an individual basis. Why isn’t a woman capable of standing up for herself and resisting emotional manipulation? Why should a man be expected to act in her best interests when she herself isn’t capable of standing up for herself? I mean you do beleive in equality don’t you? Why do you keep insinuating that they aren’t capable of standing for herself and her personal boundaries?

    13) The real problem with your new standards is that you will be criminalizing normal as opposed to aberant behavior. Through out the animal kingdom, whenever there is sexual reproduction, there is a “mating dance” these biological scripts are hard-wired throughout each species and vary greatly between the species and the sexes. In nearly every case, the female is pursued and must actively resist the advnces of multiple suitors. The No sex can occur until the female lets down her guard. The males are biologically programmed for an unrelenting pursuit. These behaviors are consistent throughout humanity as well. It is shameful to associated normal, healthy, apporopriate male behavior with actual rape and it’s legally dangerous as well. Expanding the definition of rape will increase the incarceration rates to ridiculous levels. Additionally, the psychological torment of beleiving that normal healthy sexual behavior is dirty, wrong, criminal, and perverse leads to mental illness, depression, and suicide. If you, as a woman, want the freedom to own your body and your sexuality, then it’s unfortunately, up to you to defend it.

    14) “As for that last paragraph, then I guess men should also be rapists for doing things like working out, wearing nice clothes, buying a woman a drink, showing off, and whatever else men do which might attract a woman. Stop trying to connect a to g.”

    MODERATOR’S NOTE: This comment is in violation of our moderation policy because it is much too long. This is a warning. Further comments that are in violation will be removed. See complete commenting guidelines here.

    • So let me start by saying that I am addressing your post Rob, I am neither supporting nor going against Jess’.

      10) Honestly this whole idea of persuading women to have sex makes me pretty uncomfortable. Not because I have any problem with sex, in fact the opposite. This was typical back when sex was taboo, when women grew up being told they weren’t supposed to want sex, that it was dirty, a girl had to protect her modesty, etc. But then we had what some people like to call a sexual revolution. These days women are in tune with their bodies and sexuality much more so, and are not afraid to say that we enjoy and want sex without having to be ‘persuaded’. I’m not saying some women don’t behave like this, they do, but it is not the norm, and it is harmful (as I will explain below).

      7) A very basic lesson in logic would teach you that ‘I assert myself, I am a man, therefore all men assert themselves’ is pretty flawed. Not all men are assertive. Not all women are assertive.

      Let me describe to you a situation. So for some reason you’re alone with a guy. You don’t want to have sex with him; maybe you’re just kissing him, whatever. Then he tries to take things to the next level and you simply say no, maybe carrying on kissing or try to move away. He tries to ‘persuade’ you…carries on trying to unbutton your blouse…you say no again. Maybe this happen a couple more times. By now you’ve said no at least 4 times and are actively trying to move away…but he is quite persistent.

      Now you have two choices. 1 – you can have sex with him even though you’d rather be walking over hot coals. 2 – you can try to assert yourself, very firmly say no, shout, tell him that is he proceeds with what he is doing it will be rape, try to run, try to call the police.

      If you choose option 2 there is a risk that he is one of the few bad apples…I mean you’ve said no 4 times already and he hasn’t listened…it really seems like he doesn’t care whether you want it or not. Also we live in a society where rape jokes are ‘funny’ and women and constantly objectified. If you choose option 2 and it turns out he is willing to violently rape you then he will stop you from shouting, running, or calling the police and rape you. I’m not saying that most men would do this, and I imagine this would only happen a small proportion of the time. But there is a small chance. So, do you want to take that risk? Very possibly not. Rape is devastating. I personally want to avoid it at all costs. So sometimes women will be coerced into sex through fear of violence. And regardless of what we define this to be surely everyone can agree that this is something we don’t want happening. What man wants to have sex with a woman who is only going along with it because she is too afraid not to? No decent man in existence. And for a woman it is degrading and humiliating, but preferable to rape. Really are these the choices we should face?

      This is why I think the whole persuasion thing is so damaging. Yes probably most of the time this is how men are thinking about the encounters….and some women will too. But a lot of men and women don’t consider this normal behaviour. If I want to have sex with someone I will tell him. And if a man doesn’t listen to my initial protestations then I will become pretty scared. Why can’t we just err on the side of caution? If a women says ‘no’ (regardless of in what tone), a man should say ‘OK then, should I leave?’, if a woman then actually wants to have sex she will probably say ‘no, let’s go upstairs’ and if she doesn’t she will say ‘yes I think that would be best’. Everyone wins. (obviously these quotes are just silly examples…..but this is how the situation would ideally go).

      13) Please don’t liken men to animals, and don’t liken women to animals either. We are all capable of many more complex feeling, emotions and behaviours that animals.

      Also, it’s up to us to defend our bodies? Seriously? Rape is our fault now? What because we’re not strong enough? I wish I were strong enough to be able to fight a man off. But I’m not. And I can’t afford self-defence classes. Guess I deserve to be raped then right?

      Also generally I’m a bit confused by your definition of rape. If a woman says no and means it, then a man proceeds to have sex with her… that is rape. She doesn’t have to be screaming or struggling. Sometimes fear causes people to freeze. And mainly you’d be afraid that screaming or struggling would make him more violent.

      I’m not saying sex is bad. Sex is fantastic. No-one should be ashamed of sex. But if you rape or sexually assault someone then hell yes you should be ashamed.

      9) What statistics do you have on this? Do you refer to statistics on reported sexual assault and rape cases? Sexual assault and rape is under-reported, that is a fact. Sure I can’t speak for the whole country but I have been raped once and sexually assaulted by men I didn’t know in public at least 15 times (and that is a conservative estimate) and I didn’t report them (because it would be my word against theirs….and we all know how that plays out). I know most of my female friends have been sexually assaulted in some way. If a woman told me she had never been sexually assaulted I’d be genuinely surprised, and that is not an exaggeration (not shocked, just surprised…..and very very jealous). And I am NOT saying that all men do this. Of course not. But some do, and I guess they do it to a lot of women. Official statistics don’t reflect reality.

      • “Official statistics don’t reflect reality.” Jess you make so many good points above, but this one is the best and the one from which I’d like to begin my own rebuttal to Rob’s foolishness.

        I don’t care if the official statisticcs are 1 or 1 million women who get raped or sexually assaulted. What concerns me most about the majority of male response to this article, is their lack of concern for the greater issue. WOMEN ARE GETTING RAPED AND SEXUALLY ASSAULTED ALL OVER THE WORLD. Instead they decide that this article is about “men are evil” and launch into a non-sensical debate that re-victimizes the victims for which Hugo wrote this article.

        Gentleman (and I am using this term loosely), this article isn’t about you and your stupid egos. This article is about helping and supporting women who need it. The same women who birthed you and brought your lame, chauvanistic ass into this world. The same women who are your sisters your aunts, grandmothers,, your friends and possibly your wife (G-d forbid). Show some respect!

        Finally to re-iterate what Louise already says above and to address the argument that I see men bring up so often in this chain of comments. When in doubt, JUST ASK! So you’re on a date and you’re looking for signals from a woman that she’ is ready and willing to get busy, but you don’t know how to go about it and you don’t want to come off as some creepy pervert or worse end up in jail because she cries “rape”. Here’s an idea, JUST ASK! Don’t persuade, don’t seduce, don’t try to guilt, JUST ASK! You will get one of three responses and I will even explain what they mean. If she says yes, then that means all systems go and you should proceed to get naked. If she says no, then that means NO! Put on the brakes, dial back the sex-o-meter several notches, keep your damn clothes on and your hands to yourself.

        If she seems unsure, guess what? that means NO! repeat procedure for the no response.

        If she says no after she has already said yes and you’re already naked? guess what? that means NO!

        and when you’re not sure what the hell her response is, if you’re a smart guy, you’ll assume that that means NO! too.

        Does this seem unfair and like it puts alot of the onus on you to take responsibility for whether or not the woman you are dating cries rape later, absolutely it does! But guess what, life is unfair and there are women in this world who don’t know what the hell they want and will be wishy washy about it and that’s why it’s so important for men to spend more time thinking with the head on the shoulders and not the one in their pants. When in doubt, assume the answer is NO! or ask for clarification and until you get it, flashing greenlights and a marching band singing “Bring it on home”, err on the side of caution and walk away!

        As Louise mentions above, an assertive woman, a woman who’s got her head right on her shoulders will have no problems letting you know when she is open to sex and when she is most definitely NOT. if you are with a woman who doens’t embody this quality, then you don’t want to be in that situation anyway. and if you’re so horny that you can’t control yourself and don’t wait for a clear response to your question, than guess what, you got no one to blame but yourself for the consequences.

        Nuff said, good luck, be safe and stay out of trouble.

  102. I’m going to start off by being blunt: the premise of this article is rubbish.

    A few days before Christmas of 2011, I was physically assaulted – without provocation – by a drunk man in the street. He threw a drink in my face, pummeled me and shoved me into oncoming traffic (lucky for me ABS was invented, eh?). He also happened to be African.

    By the author’s logic, I should now be in — and should have every reason to — fear (of) Africans/blacks, or at least be fearful for my safety around them.

    Forgive me, and call me too trusting (or whatever you like), but screw that. I am not going to spend the rest of my days stealing wary glances at groups of African men and wondering when they’ll try to stab me (I live in an area of Melbourne (Aus) with a very high East African population, so I guess if I was going to do that I might as well stay indoors). I’m not going to start distrusting black work-mates or black strangers. If anything other than drunken – or possibly drugged – loutishness was at the foundation of my assault, it certainly wasn’t race. It is not up to other members of the African community to prove themselves to me because of the actions of one moronic individual who happens to hail from the same locale (or ethnic background, at least) as them. If I become paranoid around black people, THAT IS MY PROBLEM.

    The same applies here. It is not up to men (of the non-raping – i.e. majority – variety) to continually prove themselves to women, to protest their innocence to every female stranger they meet. If some women are terrified of men, then that is their problem (sounds harsh, but there it is). The affected woman may develop coping strategies or avoid situations that make her feel uncomfortable, but it is unfair and unreasonable to place the onus for her comfort on a complete stranger whom she has judged entirely on the basis of having a surplus of testosterone. At the risk of sounding like a broken record, screw that.

    • The problem with your comparison is that black men have not been systematically oppressing your gender/race and exercising power over you since, well, literally the dawn of the human race. In addition, I’m not sure about Australia, but in the US black men actually DO get stigmatized for violence, despite the fact that more white men commit (violent) crimes than black ones. So…your comparison isn’t apt.

      • I hope you aren’t implying that women in the west are “systematically oppressed” here in 2012. That would be ridiculous, right? Believe it or not, some people actually believe that even though there’s no evidence of it.

        • Yes. Women are systematically oppressed. Just because you, as a male, have not felt the effects of sexism DOES NOT MEAN IT DOES NOT EXIST

          • Tom Brechlin says:

            Proof? Just because someone, generally feminist, says they are oppressed doesn’t make it so. Modern feminism has been here for 30 years, no way you can tell me that women are systematically oppressed. Domestic violence call is made, in MOST cases the officers going to that call have already assumed that the man is the perp. At what age are women “required” to sign up for selective service? Oh wait!! They aren’t required! “Women and children first” on a sinking ship is still in place. Even the armed forces have lowered their expectations in boot camp….. c’mon, who are you kidding?

          • Only according to feminist theory, which only a small minority of women subscribe to. The vast majority of women are reasonable, see thIngs as they are in 2012, and aren’t stuck in 1950.

            • Tom Brechlin says:

              I wish I could agree with you about the small minority of women. Men bad women victims is continiously being fed to the public which is a small example of the reality of todays society. Marriage rates are also reflective as to how women think these days. Women are taught to believe that they don’t need a man … look at gender studies in universities. It’s bad and it’s getting worse.

          • BTW, an individual saying or doing something sexist and your theory of “systematic oppression”, as in some organized global conspiracy engaged in by all males to oppress all females are not only two very different things, but the latter is simply impossible and out of touch with reality.

      • “…despite the fact that more white men commit (violent) crimes than black ones.”

        Not proportionally, which is to say that there is a far higher percentage of black men, among the general population of black men, committing violent crimes — especially rape and murder — then white men among the general population of white men. And yes, a woman –white, black, hispanic, or of any other ethnicity — is about 100 times at higher risk of sexual assault from a black man than a white man.

        • Tom Brechlin says:

          Glad you said “proportionately” in that it brings to light a little known fact about women and child support. Yes, men overall owe more $ in child support then women but as we know, men get the short end in that arena. Truth is, women proportionately are more in arrears then men. Sorry, just had to add that.

      • Heisenberg says:

        His comparison is 100% apt because it is based on subjective experience. When we fear something, we don’t really take into account the macro-context. We experience things, interpret them, and then base future beliefs and actions on our interpretation. To say his comparison is not apt is to deny that his assault may have had as large an impact on him that a sexual assault would have on a woman.

        Women have the right to view us men as guilty until proven innocent because of their individual interpretation of the world around them. Just as anyone has the same right to view any demographic with suspicion based on their own subjectivity. I pity people who do this, because they may shut themselves off from worthwhile experiences, without ever really protecting themselves completely from harm.

      • @kyidyl: SRSLY? Schoma has stated clearly that despite her initial feelings of distrust towards black men after being raped by them, she has found the courage and the inner strength to overcome them and realize that being raped was not her fault, she had to find it in herself to heal and get on with her life. Sounds to me like Schoma truly is a strong woman. I have no doubt that being raped makes people feel very angry and powerless. But she chose not to be helpless nor succumb to prejudice. So what you’re saying is just politically correct piffle.

    • @ Schoma:

      I thought that was a very compelling reply to Hugo’s article. In my opinion, there is great wisdom and moving conviction in your logic. I agree with you, and I think you have illuminated an important implication of Hugo’s article. You’ve got me thinking.

    • Women are not assuming all men are rapists until proven otherwise, but self-preservation does demand a certain amount of caution in order to avoid bad situations. We are taught by our culture but a LOT of it comes from experience. When I was younger (late teens, early 20s) I was really friendly with random strangers. After MANY incidents with men I didn’t know taking my friendliness as an invitation and touching me, following me, refusing to leave me alone after my telling them to do so, calling me rude words, grabbing my arm so I couldn’t get away, or otherwise intimidating or disrespecting me, I became a lot less friendly to men I didn’t know. I stopped looking men in the eye on the street. If someone approaches me in a genuinely friendly way I’ll be nice to them, but I do have my guard up, because I don’t want to have to deal with that shit anymore. I don’t think that every man, or even every man who disrespected me, is a rapist, but the fact that they were immediately threatening me or trying to force me into an interaction showed me that they might be capable of more. This is NOT about a one-time incident, this is a lifetime of strangers leading me to distrust them. The fact that I am more wary of men walking down the street than women is based on a lifetime of experience where I have never had a woman try to follow me, grope my body, manipulate me into doing something with them. The fact is, I haven’t been made to feel threatened by very many women but have spent my whole life dealing with threatening behaviour from men.

      Making the analogy that if one man beats up another man, should he then assume all people of that race are violent? That is not proper analogy to this situation at all. To help you understand, it would be more like this: if all of your life, people of a certain race were constantly harassing you, following you, grabbing your body, trying to guilt you into doing things for them, if you knew that many of your friends had been assaulted, raped, stalked, molested, by people of that race, that several of them had their drinks spiked with drugs by people of that race, and none or almost none of them had experienced this from any other race, then you know what? yes, I think in that situation, it would be acceptable for you to be wary of people of that race until they’d shown that they weren’t like the hundreds that had disrespected or harmed you or your loved ones.

  103. To all the whiny men commenting.

    Boo Hoo. You have it SO hard

    • Tom Brechlin says:

      For the past 30 years, if a man said what you just did, they would be pegged as a chauvinist pig. Am I seeing a double standard here? And yes, we have it a lot harder then you would like to believe. Truth is no one whines more then women. Maybe if men whine more, the suicide rate for men wouldn;t be as high as it is. Yes, women “attempt” suicide more but men succeed far more then women.

      • @Tom I tell you what, I’ll acknowledge the challenges men have in society if you acknowledge the challenges women have. We all have challenges. This article is about understanding each others challenges. You’re doing a really awesome job of whining Tom, you must have a rather developed feminine side then if it’s only women who whine.

        Do you live you’re life everyday with a wee bit of fear? Fear that someone will hurt you? Think about the scrawny boy in grade school that got picked on the big boys all the time and all the other guys stand around laugh. Being female in society is much like being the scrawny boy. It is the way it is, you can acknowledge it or not, but until men start acknowledging it will not change and women will continue to live with fear, and to do their best to stay away from potentially harmful men.

  104. Schoma, I was thinking about your January 4 post when I was writing this. 

    Hugo, I found your article challenging- while I believe that you write from a deeply held sense of conviction and empathy. We must always try empathize, understand, and have a deeply abiding compassion for others. But beyond this, though, I found myself focusing on some of what I saw as the broader, more troubling implications of you article.

    Someone told me not too long ago ‘never accept double standards; though stereotypes may be accurate sometimes, it just doesn’t lend weight to stereotyping in general.’ Hugo’s article, (as I saw it) takes a position (right or wrong) that ‘safety’ (or rather, the perception of ‘safety’) is paramount over impartiality; that security trumps, that it MUST trump impartiality, and that the two are mutually exclusive. That is, it seems to be saying: It’s alright to use stereotypes, it’s alright (for one group) to use prejudice, because might keep them safer, and it might make them feel better, besides. As I write those words, I am struck by how similar this is to some of the debates in North America about the moral, ethical, legal, practical and security questions associated with racial and religious profiling. These are not simple, unidimensional questions. How much violence is the presumption of innocence worth? What is an acceptable level risk versus an acceptable level of liberty?    

    Hugo seems to be saying in the article that ‘This is why some women see all men as potential rapists, and, really, it’s ok that some women do that- because all men contribute to the formation of an individual woman’s subjective impression of men.’ There’s something (for me, anyway) deeply paradoxical there: On the one hand he seems to say, ‘don’t judge women who judge men collectively’ because these people are basing their reactions in accordance with their (subjective) realities, their individual life experiences and/or ‘objective’ possibilities.

    Individual realities are (in my mind, anyway) subjective, and, at least to a certain degree, arbitrary: In the end, how another person sees me and relates to me is up to them- it’s their psyche, and I’m just another random stimuli in it (This is getting more existential than I was hoping). That said, their actions and reactions to me inform and create my reality as well. I can choose to reciprocate mistrust and prejudice with corresponding mistrust and prejudice, or not. In the end, it’s arbitrary. ( I keep thinking of that line from the end of “No Country for Old Men” – when somebody says “The coin don’t have no say. It’s just you.”)

    We all have individual will and freedom of conscience: At certain level, psyche is sovereign. And while it is by no means collectively reasonable to expect someone who has been visited by evil to try to repay strangers with trust, I find it hard to deny that, whatever their choice, in the end, it’s beyond anyone else’s control. There is no collective will- and “collective influence” is, again, at the mercy of arbitrary and subjective individual choice.

    Hugo, In your conclusion you said: “Holding other men accountable, challenging sexist and objectifying language and behavior in yourself and in other males (whether or not women are around) is the single most effective thing men can do to change the culture of ‘guilty until proven innocent'” –  I don’t disagree with your general prescription there, but I strongly disagree with your rationale.

    I choose to reject sexism, coercion and violence- and because I choose to do so, I am morally and ethically compelled expect the same from others insofar as I am empowered to do so. I will not tacitly accept that behavior from other people which I reject for myself outright. But Hugo, I do not choose to do those things to assuage, as you put it, a sense of ‘not entirely undeserved’ collective guilt as a male. I do not consider that to be a valid rationale to do those things, even though I  believe they are the right things to do. You’re saying that men should do this, essentially, because then women will have less cause to hate and fear them. I say it’s pointless to base your actions solely on the hopes of appeasing the collective or the individual external expectations of others- how they perceive you is beyond your control, and moreover, you yourself said that it’s unreasonable to expect that it is- “No woman can walk down the street and as she passes a man, know with certainty that he isn’t a threat.”  

    There is a certain hollowness to the rationale in your conclusion. 
    Just do it because it’s the right thing to do. Haters are still going to hate, whether you do the right thing, the wrong thing, or nothing at all.    

    I choose to do what I do because I am morally and ethically compelled to do so by my (subjective) reality and my value judgments- but more than that, I choose to do it because I choose to do it. It’s not scientific, but it’s subjectively real.    

    I don’t think that this is what you wanted, but sir, you have offered a very reasoned and moral justification for bigotry. You are not going to change the culture of “guilty until proven innocent” by building on a foundation which proceeds from the fundamental premise that ‘guilty until proven innocent’ is acceptable- it just doesn’t work; it’s self-contradictory.

    • Heisenberg says:

      Wow. I posted a small response about five posts up. Then scrolled down to see yours. I completely agree with what you’ve written. Thanks for articulating it better than I did.

  105. Well said, Hugo!

  106. Eric M. says:

    Of course, everyone realizes that this “all men are rapists or potential rapists” argument/philosophy is considered by me and many women to be a steaming pile of misandry. Thankfully, the making of such arguments are no longer nearly as common around these parts.

    That said, last night, I (a healthy, robust black man) gave two young very attractive while female strangers a ride home from the grocery store. Turns out that were young French women who had just moved here from France for work and didn’t yet have a car. They were standing there with loads of groceries not sure what to do. Any women stop and ask them if they needed help? Nope. Just a black guy.

    I assumed that they just needed help getting their stuff to their car, but then they explained they were planning to walk, which was going to be impossible. So, a black man offers these two pretty young female strangers a ride. Their response? They looked at each other and asked if I wouldn’t mind. Then they happily accepted the ride, assuming that I was not a rapist or killer.

    I told them that in my community, if I hadn’t stopped to ask if they needed help, no doubt someone else absolutely would. I truly believe that. They explained to me that, in France, no one would bother to stop, which I found to be surprising. So, no, we’re not all rapists , and aren’t always assumed to be so by rational women.

  107. guilty until proven innocent,what a joke
    .and i’m glad this writer sees the foggyness of misplaced anger toward feminism…….for the responders who think shaking an abuser loose is easy-they don’t stop,u have to keep moving to live. you are either in denial of actual abuse statistics or choose to ignore them.50%of women killed by a stalker-stalker is an ex-boyfriend or husband.
    writer- you are definetely evolved in your response to your thoughts as a young man… Sexualization and rape are not about being attractive or young. it is a way for the perpretrator to kill what they find most loathsome in themselves, or some woman in their past who messed them up.
    u say :”frustrating to be viewed with suspicion merely because of one’s sex? Heck yes. (Is it frustrating to be viewed as a sexual object merely because one is young and female? Ask around.) Men ought to be angry that they need to “prove their harmlessness.” Indeed, they ought to be enraged! But our anger is rightly directed not at women who have been the victims (individually and collectively) of predatory males, but at those men who have “poisoned the well” for everyone else. Rather than demand that women “smile more” or “trust more” or “just know that I’m a good guy,” men need to channel their frustration at being “pre-judged” into a commitment to end what it is that causes women’s suspicion in the first place.–Well, men need to channel into: respecting women,that’s it. Easy right?
    ur ?- women’s “suspicion” :although men are it seems even more “suspicious” of why a woman wants them(money,sex,is the general consensus,eventual marriage,kids) what causes the suspicion is men’s general disrespect, abuse, and yes, rape and murder of all two and four legged creatures regardless of age,species, or sex. don’t worry about it tho,prisons r crowded&u’ll get off with an ankle bracelet if they actually take the time to catch ya.

  108. Hugo, clearly you do not check you facts before writing an article. Men are overwhelming more likely to be the victim of assault and violence, not women.

  109. Hugo, I’m very sorry about this, but it appears you were the victim of brainwashing at a very young and impressionable age. Take some comfort in knowing that it wasn’t your fault. Who knows, if I had taken Women’s Studies classes at 19 my mind might have been polluted in a similar way. It’s not too late though my friend, you can still pull out of it. We’ll be here waiting for you on the other side.

  110. Joey Joe Joe says:

    I wonder if Hugo accepts racial profiling as well.

  111. Cecil Westervelt says:

    Seriously, what a crap article. You’re arguing that if a man in Florida rapes a woman, I am therefore guilty by proxy, from the cradle to the grave. The overwhelming majority of men are not rapists, and would give their lives to prevent a stranger from being raped. Their reward for that? Being called a rapist by default. Silence is not tacit support or approval. In fact, you’ve presented nothing in terms of actual fact, your viewpoint is skewed beyond any reason, and your bias obvious. What’s worse, is that you actually produce this, in line with things known to be false, as a supporting argument for non fact as rebuttal to fact.
    You may be ok with being held up as guilty until proven female. That being the case, I strongly urge you to do the right thing and go turn yourself in for rape.

  112. Pallus Pallafox says:

    It sounds like Hugo is talking about self-preservation. We (women and men) lock our doors, especially at night, lock up the car, purchase security systems, carry pocket knives, carry pepper spray/mace, and even own guns. We do so under the assumption that, if we don’t, we are leaving ourselves open to harm. There is a pervasive prejudice that goes into the effort of self preservation, but it is the individual’s right to defend him or herself from a world that they feel is unsafe. Ideally we will never have to use violent means to protect ourselves, so often people will choose to walk on well-lit paths and walk in groups for the sake of security.
    It is unfortunate when a person’s efforts at self-preservation means that you will have a harder time finding a date, but that’s the only way that your target population is guaranteed some measure of safety. To that person, you getting a date is not as important as their life. Consider not smiling or making eye contact on the street to be the social equivalent to keeping the doors locked. Limitations on (social) entry have been preemptively put in place, for the sake of self preservation.
    Beating on the door that has locked you out is the wrong way to approach the situation. Looking out for your neighbors’ well-being and being vigilant about the community’s conduct towards one-another, however, might make the neighborhood’s atmosphere a little bit safer for everyone.
    Certainly most of us aren’t muggers, stereo thieves, or murderers, but we get locked out of other people’s property and lives regardless. But people lock up their houses and cars, and carry pepper spray regardless. In that regard, we are all guilty until proven innocent.
    Understand that we live in a society that still chastises women who are assaulted at night because they “shouldn’t have been out by themselves to begin with”. In such an unsupportive environment, the dating odds are against you. In the off-chance that you are a rapist and she does get assaulted, she might get blamed for it. Same goes with a man who gets mugged while taking a shortcut home from work. “He was an idiot for not walking on main street where it’s well-lit”. Victims of all demographics get blamed for the misconduct of others.
    It’s not fair for non-raping, non-mugging people to be prejudged as potential assaulters, but the individual and your target population have the right to personal security. In a world where about 1/4 women and 1/7 men have been the targets of successful and/or attempted sexual assaults, and where most of us know at least one person who has been assaulted, can we not have a little empathy when people get nervous around others? That’s a lot of flipping people who have been the victims of violence. Don’t take their anxiety so personally. Not everything is a personal affront to one’s character.

    • So are you ok with a white man fearing black men because a few black men beat him up?

      • If you’re in a neighborhood where you don’t feel safe, for whatever reason, and you decide not to walk around in the middle of the night, does anyone have the right to take that as a personal offense? Especially when, in the event of you being assaulted or robbed, you’ll hear “you shouldn’t have been out at night in a bad neighborhood! What the fuck did you think would happen?!”

    • Pallus Pallafox,

      I think you’re analogy is on target here. I’d add (probably covered already) that the the consequence of keeping your guard up might be an absence of a positive interaction vs the consequence of letting your guard down is disaster. Probabilities don’t really factor in since this is an emotional issue. Ubderstandably emotional.

      And speakinb of emotions, you’re right that the challenge is to “not take this so personally”, but that’s tough for many people to do. Men who respond particularly strongly to women’s indifference, whatever the reason for the indifference, are probably feeling like their options are scarce. That feeling in men, whether real or anxietyt driven, should have no bearing on how women behave, but it does make it tough to find the “don’t take it personal” switch. Everything seems personal when you fear that you’re running out of options.

  113. I kind of understand Schwyzer’s story here, but holding an entire gender guilty until proven innocent
    is pointless. Rapists and violent nutcases will always walk the Earth and their deeds may never be fully prevented. There won’t be a chance for the decent majority of men to be proven innocent and that is unfair.

    As a young woman I too have experienced that anxiety when a strange man walks briskly
    behind me in a dark street. But if I notice that the man is in fact a woman, the anxiety vanishes.
    How weird is that? Women too have assaulted, robbed and even assisted in acts of sexual violence.
    I should be scared of them too, but I’m not. I wasn’t taught to.

    Ever since I was a little girl, my mother has reminded me to stay away from strange *men*. I should never accept candy, drinks, lift or even respond to them. She was genuinely concerned of her children’s
    safety and wanted to be sure, so she taught us to fear all unfamiliar men. Decent advice, since
    small children don’t have the judgement and experience adults have.

    The problem is that the mantra never changed when we grew older. My mother now openly talked about the actual threat, sexual violence, but never told us that it’s more likely to be assaulted and raped by a family member than some random guy lurking in the park. I don’t think she even knew.
    She never tried to teach us how to recognize truly suspicious or harmful behavior,
    probably because she didn’t know how to and was too scared to let us trust men.
    But no one else taught us to recognize suspicious behavior either. It never even came up.

    so, all I had was the suspicion and anxiety when strange men approached or even seemed a possible threat. I know by experience that majority of men are quite nice and the studies and articles I’ve read supports the idea that only a minority of men randomly assault or rape people in the streets.
    But like Schwyzer told in his story, there’s no way knowing if that guy walking behind me is of the majority or of the minority. Still, the never ending suspicion is not only unfair to the decent guys,
    but it also burdens the women. No one wins.

    I have tried to unlearn some of the anxiety with the help of a personal alarm. When I have this
    “panic button” in my hand, I don’t fear unfamiliar men as much as I usually do. Obviously
    this won’t be enough help to clear the anxiety assaulted people have for strangers, but I’ve never
    been assaulted, so it works.
    It helps to know that I can distract the possible attacker with an ear splitting siren for a few seconds,
    and bolt away. I’m glad there hasn’t been a single time I have really needed the alarm,
    although I have encountered or even talked to the many Scary Strange Men my mother warned about.

    I’m still a fan of self preservation. I stay alert and keep the alarm with me always, because the violent asshole might cross my path one day.
    It’s perfectly reasonable to lock your doors, avoid dangerous, unlit areas, keep an eye on your drink,
    staying away from drunken aggressive people etc. I’m simply trying, little by little, to unlearn the
    idea that all unfamiliar men are dangerous, because it only builds more suspicion rather than creates safety.

    Sorry for the long post, btw.

  114. I really think you should be ashamed of yourself dude. You wrote an article justifying prejudice against other people. It doesn’t make you brave, informed or unique to say something like this, it just means you’re prejudiced, and what’s worse you’re prejudiced against your own sex.

    I agree with you about women being oppressed, but as a gay man, I actually still have laws against me. Not only can I not get married, but it’s still legal to discriminate against me when I apply for a job in many states, and of course there’s the social oppression in most areas of the country. (By the way, it’s also socially acceptable to beat me up because I’m a gay MAN not a gay woman.) And you write an article like this, where I should start looking after women who look at me with suspicion without knowing me, without ever talking to me? I guess I’m guilty too, since I have a penis.

    I guess since there’s so many people who are homophobic (INCLUDING WOMEN), by your logic I should look at everyone with suspicion and assume that everyone means me harm since I’ve been beat up for being gay. I guess if I saw you walking down the street, I should automatically judge you and assume you’re homophobic. And I’m also guessing that if you can posit self-interest as a reason for justifying this disgusting article, then it’s ok for me in my self-interest not to support women’s issues anymore since what you say is against my self-interest. Honestly dude, you are a sexist.

    And f you really believed in equality, you wouldn’t focus all of your energy on one particular group of people. Women are way down the list when it comes to oppression in my opinion, and I think an article like this polarizes the issue and drives a wedge of hostility between the two sexes rather than trying to bring them together. It’s never wise to do things the way you are doing them.

  115. If I walked alone in the middle of the night and met a woman and she scared of me of being a rapist, I would not be offended. Well I know I’m not a rapist, why would I be offended? If she scared, its her problem, not me. And I think its good for her to take a defensive stance. After all there are really bad people out there . I would be scared of thief and robbers and murderers too if I walking in the night alone. And its my problem, not others. If I have a daughter, I also would tell her to be careful of strangers if she walking in the middle of the night alone.

    Why would I take the offense if women scared of rapist? I’m not a rapist. This is my stance. Sorry, but you being scared is not really my problem. No offense.

  116. “Men who grumble about being “guilty until proven innocent” are demanding to be seen as individuals, separate from their perceived sex and the history that goes with it. That’s a tempting but unreasonable demand to make.”

    Asking to be treated as individuals is not an unreasonable demand. Stereotyping men as potential rapists is a sexist thing to do, and it is no different from negatively stereotyping any other such group. In some places, black people also face similar racist stereotyping, where people assume that just because someone is black, they are more likely to commit a crime. This is also apparent where police stop and search black people much more often than others. The discrimination is the same here, but the victim of the discrimination is a different group.

    “But our anger is rightly directed not at women who have been the victims (individually and collectively) of predatory males, but at those men who have “poisoned the well” for everyone else.”

    The anger is rightly directed at those that perpetuate sexism and racism. Criminals will get their fair share of anger, for they have committed a crime (or many crimes). But people are responsible for their own actions. If police stop and search me just because of my skin, I am not going to blame that on other black people. Similarly, if women assume that I am a bad person just because of my gender, that will be their (individual, not collective) fault, not that of other men.

  117. Dan Murphey says:

    This is so reassuring to read. I feel exactly the same about black people, and was worried that I was guilty of prejudice. I’ve been a victim of crime twice in my life; a house robbery and a mugging, both times the perpetrator was a black man. If a black man “proves their harmlessness” sufficiently, I’m pretty alright with them, so I don’t think I’m a racist as such. Just reasonably suspicious of a large group of overwhelmingly innocent people.

Trackbacks

  1. […] so, Hugo Schwyzer writes an article on that very thing today “In Rape Culture, All Men Are Guilty Until Proven Innocent.” I should be overjoyed. Hugo is saying that it is ok that I presume men are guilty until proven […]

  2. […] Twitter squabble when Tom Matlack pissed off the radfems by objecting to Schwyzer’s post In Rape Culture, All Men Are Guilty Until Proven Innocent, and then by daring to suggest […]

  3. […] of Young Men and Helped Make the U.S. Into a Selfish, Greedy Nation Nerds and Male Privilege In Rape Culture, All Men Are Guilty Until Proven Innocent Romney’s Truthiness (“when Romney declares that Obama has been apologizing for America, or […]

  4. […] morning I read an article by Hugo Shwyzer (of the Good Men Project) entitled “Men are Guilty until Proven Innocent in a Rape Culture”. The article, boiled down, suggested that in a culture where women have good reason to fear […]

  5. […] if all men were potential attackers. Happened to catch this opinion piece regarding that subject. In Rape Culture, All Men Are Guilty Until Proven Innocent by @hugoschwyzer I'm not sure I agree with him, but the comments? Just […]

  6. […] 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 […]

  7. […] der Männer“ (Male Guilt) und Rape Culture. In einen Artikel mit dem Titel „In Rape Culture, All Men Are Guilty Until Proven Innocent“ stellt er seine Sicht zur Schuld der Männer an einer Vergewaltigung […]

  8. […] his position as a teacher to sleep with students, to mention but a few of the least awful reasons. This article, however, has truly convinced me that he is not only a shitty excuse for a teacher but a shitty […]

  9. […] with me, as he almost always does. All along I’ve been firmly entrenched with Hugo in the “Rape Culture Exists” camp, and Marcus has identified more with Tom. Because he’s a man and I’m a woman? Maybe. […]

  10. […] as Hugo Schwyzer pointed out here—which was one of the catalysts to huge controversy, men should be angry—not at feminists for describing rape culture, but at rape culture’s insistence on a vile […]

  11. […] Read more here. Like this:LikeBe the first to like this post. Filed under Uncategorized | Leave a comment […]

  12. […] women as ‘complicit’ victims to the crime being inflicted upon them, but it also casts men as being unable to control their masculine urges. The West has a rape culture problem. One that has […]

  13. […] emphasise women as ‘complicit’ victims to the crime being inflicted upon them, but it also casts men as being unable to control their masculine urges. The West has a rape culture problem. One that has […]

Speak Your Mind

*