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


  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.”

      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.


              “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:

              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:


            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://

              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://

              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:

          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?


              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 ( 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://

      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://

      • 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^)


        • 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:


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


              In fact, this has become a world-wide phenomenon and trend:

              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.

            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://

  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.


  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.”

      “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.


  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