A response to the argument of Schroedinger’s Rapist and an examination of anti-black racism.
This morning I made a reference to the fact that men are often assumed to be potential rapists as an example of how sexism negatively affects men as well as women. The argument, commonly referred to as “Schroedinger’s Rapist”, goes something like this: because you can’t know for sure if the stranger approaching you in a dark alley or other unsafe place is a rapist or not, it is generally a good idea to be on your guard. Men can enhance their interactions with women by being aware of this mindset, and adjusting their own behaviour accordingly.
I have often heard from people making an anti-feminist argument that Schroedinger’s Rapist is profoundly sexist and unfair. After all, most men do not rape – why should every man be treated like a rapist? Isn’t that discrimination? How can you claim to be opposed to sexism, yet promote a fundamentally sexually prejudicial idea? The next step is often to draw parallels to racism – is it fair to treat all black people as potential criminals simply because, statistically speaking, there are more black criminals than white ones? Isn’t that racist?
As much as I hate it when white people use anti-black racism as a cudgel with which to beat other people, I can understand the conundrum as it is expressed. The problem with it (and the reason why it’s so bothersome to hear white people talk about anti-black racism) is that it fails to address the question in a meaningful way. To demonstrate what I mean, I’d like to share a couple of personal anecdotes from my own life. I’ve never shared these stories with anyone before, and I’m not sure why because there’s nothing particularly embarrassing about them, and they’re extremely useful in this context.
♦◊♦
When I was in high school, I was the de facto manager of my string quartet. We were gaining a bit of a reputation – we were pretty good, and young people are a novelty – and had picked up a lot of gigs playing weddings. One particular evening, I was supposed to meet the bride-to-be at her church. I had been hanging out at my friend’s house, and was walking from his place to the church. Unhappily, I realized that I was running a bit late – very unprofessional – so I decided to pick up my pace. It was cool outside, so I had my hoodie up.
I was trucking along at a fairly decent pace when I noticed an older woman ahead of me on the street. At first I didn’t pay any attention to her, as my intent was on making my appointment. However, as I drew closer, she became more visibly agitated, constantly looking over her shoulder and speeding up. There was no way she was going to walk faster than me, though – I was way taller than she. When I was about 50m away, she suddenly broke to the right and crossed the road – over 6 lanes of high-speed traffic. I thought it was an unusual move, considering we were nowhere near a crosswalk.
Then it finally occurred to me (when I noticed she had crossed back over once I was safely past her) – she didn’t see someone in a hurry to get to church – she saw a young black kid motoring toward her with no safe haven in sight. She took the risk of running out into the road rather than assume that I wasn’t trying to assault her. I remember that quite clearly, because it was the first time that I realized that I was a frightening sight to strangers.
♦◊♦
Years later I was working for a friend of mine who was doing his PhD thesis on perceived access to park facilities. I, along with my friend Suzie (not her real name), had to canvas the neighbourhood, going door to door and asking people to fill out surveys about their level/type of outdoor activity. After a few streets, I noticed that Suzie’s refusal rate was much lower than mine. Waterloo (where we were) is not exactly a cosmopolitan hub of multiculturalism, and the area we were in was populated by mostly older white people.
Thinking back to my traffic-dodging friend, I asked Suzie to go back to some houses that I’d had trouble with – people closing the door in my face or saying ‘no’ before I finished my sales pitch. Much as I suspected, blonde and 5’5″ Suzie was able to obtain consent from a number of people who had said no to me. This wasn’t about how I was dressed – we were both wearing identical t-shirts and jeans – this was about a huge black dude showing up at your door unexpectedly and asking questions. I learned to knock and then take several steps back from the door so as not to startle people.
One more story. Because I prefer to be able to knock off early from work, I start my day at around 7:45. This means I have to leave the house pretty early in the morning. There are often young women walking around my neighbourhood with their dogs and in their pyjamas. It’s often pretty dark at 7 am, especially in the winter. Despite my size, I am a particularly light stepper, and because my winter coat is black, I am not terribly visible. After scaring the bejezus out of my neighbours by coming up behind them completely unexpected, I have learned to start shuffling my feet when walking behind someone – giving them an auditory clue that I am there and approaching.
♦◊♦
Now there are two ways I could react to these encounters. I could rail against people for being racist and sexist and size-ist (if that’s a thing) – I’m so gentle and warm and loving! How dare they act as though I’m not? That’s one way – and it’s the stupid way. The other way is to recognize that while I strongly dislike the fact that people see me as dangerous because of how I look, it is up to me to decide what to do with that information. If I don’t care about spooking my neighbours, I don’t have to shuffle my feet – let them deal with their fright. But if I do care, then I have to find some way of mitigating that fear so we can coexist harmoniously.
Bringing this example home, men in the freethought movement have a decision to make. They (we) can rail against the hypocrisy of claiming to be anti-sexist whilst engaging in sex-based prejudicial behaviour, or we can recognize that if we want to be accommodating to women we have to make some adjustments to how we behave. It comes back to the central question: do we want women to be more comfortable? If not, then we should say so explicitly – “we don’t care about your comfort, toots! Nut up or shut up!” On the other hand, if we do care, then we can’t simply maintain the status quo of behaviour and berate women for being afraid of rape. That doesn’t solve any problems.
The other point I want to make here, which goes back to my objection to anti-black racism being used as a rhetorical device by those who will never face it, is that black people engage in tons of behaviours to make white people feel safer. We do this all the damn time. We make accommodations in speech, behaviour, dress, mannerism, conversation topic – a wide diversity of adjustments that we make in the presence of our white friends. We want them to feel comfortable around us, and we accept the inherent racism of the need for such changes. The fact that you rail against its manifest unfairness is indicative of the fact that you have no idea we’re doing it – which means, in turn, that we’re doing it well. Until I am convinced that you actually understand anti-black racism (which would take quite a bit of doing), I don’t appreciate being deputized into your anti-feminist screed in this way.
♦◊♦
Anyway, this is obviously simply my opinion and personal experience. I personally don’t have a problem with the argument, and I have done my best to illustrate why I think that Schroedinger’s Rapist, while unfortunate, is not unfair. If you disagree, I hope you will explain why in the comments.
TL/DR: I’ve frequently heard people object to the Schroedinger’s Rapist argument as sexist, with anti-black racism used as a counter-example. I reject this comparison because it neglects two important factors: 1) that the issue under discussion is about whether or not we want women to feel more comfortable; and 2) that black people often make similar behavioural adjustments to accommodate the racism of their white friends. I share some personal stories to illustrate this.
Update: Comrade Physioprof has made this excellent observation: “It is not “sexist” for women to view all men as potential rapists, because (other than in prison) men possess the privilege of being subject to a vanishingly small likelihood of being raped by either men or women, while women are subject to a substantial likelihood of being raped by men. In contrast, it is “racist” for white people to view all black people as potential criminals, because (as far as I can discern from available crime statistics) white people are the ones who possess the privilege of being less likely to be crime victims than black people, and they are more likely to be victims of crimes committed by white people than by black people.”
Update 2: Greg Laden offers another perspective on this issue.
Originally appeared at FreeThoughtBlogs.com.
—Photo kaizat /Flickr
I applaud and agree with your larger point about being aware of the perceptions of those around us and not automatically assuming that there is some nefarious prejudice behind peoples fears.
I do wish that you had not dropped the race card, because frankly all the examples you gave apply to every man. You should apply the logic you used to dispel the charges of sexism to your examples of racism.
To me the essential idea here is the one of privilege. As a man you have the priviledge to assume that you won’t get raped. As an independent young woman living in a pretty safe town, I find it hard to explain to my male friends how often I am reminded of my status as a “potential prey” in everyday life. From the slightly too-friendly neighbour to the guy walking behind you in an empty street…. It’s just always there. I’ve never been raped, but I’ve had guys follow me for 10 minutes while joking about how scared I looked.… Read more »
http://www.timwise.org/2013/08/race-crime-and-statistical-malpractice-how-the-right-manipulates-white-fear-with-bogus-data/
I didn’t write this but it’s an amazing piece deconstructing the data.
“Whites are 6 times as likely to be murdered by another white person as by a black person; and overall, the percentage of white Americans who will be murdered by a black offender in a given year is only 2/10,000ths of 1 percent (0.0002)”
So again. White fear of black people is entirely irrational and based not on personal experience but on subconscious racist viewpoints hammered home by nurture, not nature.
I liked the article, and it was a good point of view, but I do have to point out an often misquoted statistic. Black people don’t commit more crimes than white people. That’s just a flat out lie. The crime data consistently shows that an individual is anywhere between 2-7 times more likely to be the victim of a crime done by a white person than a black person. That gap in likelihood is based on the type of crime. White Collar Crimes are overwhelmingly white. Murder is roughly 1.3-1 white/black. Sexual assault, child kidnapping, and child pornography are also… Read more »
A very interesting read. I thought you might be interested in this analogy. I’ve shamelessly stolen it and used it repeatedly when friends comment about caution being unfair, catcalling being complimentary, etc.
http://gyzym.tumblr.com/post/52983582368/consider-the-bank
I heard the term ‘Schroedinger’s Rapist’ for the first time today. To me it seems to be just another symptom of rape culture. As long as potential victims are constantly told to prevent being raped (sic in itself), they will check every situation and everyone for dangers and act cautious. Because if an assault happens to them, they will for sure be asked “Why did you do this / wear this / be there / talk to / drink ……….” and so on.
It hurts everyone involved.
I agree with the gist of this article, and I’d like to add that, while women (rightly) argue we shouldn’t be held responsible for the actions of a rapist or thug, we change our behaviour to avoid the threat all the time – regardless. We dress differently to avoid attention or judgement, we don’t go places alone, we take the long way home because it’s safer and better lit, etc etc. Not every woman, and not all the time, but most women, most of the time. So it’s not a one way street by any means. I’d also add that… Read more »
here is a comment i read here ” I’m in a male dominated field and in general, we don’t hang out with the female tech. They lose out on some non-work related information, non-work related resources, and of course some social interaction. I’m sure it’s lonely being the only female. Some people would think that it’s wrong to “freeze out” a woman even unintentionally, but why is that different from SR? We act differently around her so limit our social interactions at work with her. ” i am an Israeli and been working for many years in a “male dominamt… Read more »
It’s hard to come by educated people on this subject, however, you sound like you know what you’re talking about! Thanks
The term “Schroedingers Rapist” and the argument it describes is NOT about the “dark stranger”. It was first introduced in an article that talks about women going on a date, not being accosted in an alley. This entire piece is predicated on a fallacy, and is an attempt to belittle women’s real world experience into the elevator-purse-hugging meme of racism. It is well known that the majority of rapes are committed by someone the woman knows or has met at least once. The meme of “stranger rape” has been demonstrated over and over again to be false. Anyone with sense… Read more »
But unknown men are being treated as potential rapists. THAT is what this article is about. The idea that an unknown man is going to rape you, and therefore feeling justified in treating him like a rapists.That is the argument Schroedinger’s rapist describes, and it very much IS about stranger rape. That ever man who is unknown is both a rapist and not a rapist at the same time, and can not be known until you/he open the box. The fact stranger rape is so rare actually serves to make this attitude even worst. I’m not entirely sure what you… Read more »
“I’ve frequently heard people object to the Schroedinger’s Rapist argument as sexist,” I remember reading a comment from a man, who described himself as 6 foot 3 and all musclely, but reported that he was deathly afraid of women as one woman used the threat of false accusation to abuse him. Why would his perception be treated differently from the typical woman and why shouldn’t all women be held accountable for his feelings? I don’t know if you even have to compare it to black people to see that it’s sexist. You just have to answer the question why women… Read more »
John Anderson, the example you’re giving there is of an abused man. It would be more accurate to compare his behaviour/reactions to that of other abused women, rather than to the majority.
I think there is an important flaw in the parallel between men scaring women on the street and black people scaring white people: This example flips the oppression. Men deciding to behave differently towards women is an acknowledgement of male privilege and oppressive behavior. Black people behaving differently in order to make white people feel safe is what people of color do regularly in order to make it in a predominantly white society.
I believe in freedom of association so I don’t think a woman has to talk to a man or get in the same elevator or walk on the same side of the street, etc. I do wonder how this is different from a guy not wanting to talk to a woman because she’s not conventionally attractive. People would criticize him for being shallow, but he already knows that he doesn’t want an intimate relationship with her, which is more than the woman who is afraid of a stranger knows. SR basically affects men in the same way that men’s expectation… Read more »
There’s a difference between what you’re talking about. A woman (or man) who is avoiding walking down the same side of the street as a man is doing it out of a sense of fear…misguided fear, but still it’s out of fear for personal safety. Also, these interactions are extremely brief, and avoiding it is not depriving anyone of social networking or harming interpersonal or professional relationships. When you talk about ‘freezing out’ a woman who is a co-worker, the consequences of that are much greater. Firstly, there is no fear of personal safety that is driving it. Secondly, by… Read more »
I’m sore men in nursing have it worse than she does since often times they’re prevented from performing intimate procedures on female patients. Granted, we don’t make her do the heavy lifting, but I doubt she would complain that we didn’t let her move a 500 lb. VAX and she hasn’t. “Firstly, there is no fear of personal safety that is driving it.” I’m not 100% sure that there is no fear aspect though. She seems cool. She complained about one of the guys once to a female manager, but didn’t want to press forward with the complaint when the… Read more »
Agreed, people can do whatever they like. Go ahead and get in the elevator. But don’t be offended if a woman waits for the next elevator rather than getting in with you. (Not that I do that, normally, with elevators. But I have crossed the street to avoid someone who was making me nervous.)
But don’t be offended if a woman waits for the next elevator rather than getting in with you.
Me personally, this wouldn’t offend me. What does offend me is the idea that I need to go out of my way to make said woman feel safe (like for example expecting me to take the next elevator to show that I’m not threat to her) while at the same time if this were just about any other situation other than male/female people would be tripping over themselves to call it an -ism.
agreed, in fact I HOPE you run like a scared kitten from me when I walk down the street. You wanna walk around feeling like your a hunted class of human being you go a head and live like one. If you wanna pretend like you have something to fear from me just because your naive sense of the world around you tells you your not just in as much danger when your not standing next to somebody that looks like me then you hide in the shadow the streetlight casts on me.
What does offend me is the idea that I need to go out of my way to make said woman feel safe – See more at: https://goodmenproject.com/featured-content/shuffling-feet-a-black-mans-view-of-schroedingers-rapist/#sthash.jNZZ0Tus.dpuf Sorry Danny, but this is called, living in civilised society. We all (should) go out of our way to help those in need, make others feel safe, and strive to be a positive, productive person in the community. With all due respect, if you resent this so much, go live alone on an island somewhere …?! (no-one is saying you have to wait for the next elevator – take off your sunglasses or… Read more »
I realize I’m late to this discussion, but, let me just say this. I have no expectation that men make any accommodation for my feelings. If you want to get in the elevator with me, go ahead. However, I’m responsible for my own safety and no one will take that away from me. If I suspect that a man might be following me then, yes, I might step into a store or cross the street. If you approach me and want to talk to me, if I feel uncomfortable, I may refuse to talk to you. That’s my right. I’m… Read more »
“I’m not responsible for protecting the feelings of random strangers.”
Nobody is saying that you are. But likewise strangers aren’t responsible for protecting your feelings which is what this articles is saying.
Wow talk about enlightening. That was a very good post.
Adi’s link above I mean.
Bringing this example home, men in the freethought movement have a decision to make. They (we) can rail against the hypocrisy of claiming to be anti-sexist whilst engaging in sex-based prejudicial behaviour, or we can recognize that if we want to be accommodating to women we have to make some adjustments to how we behave. It comes back to the central question: do we want women to be more comfortable? If not, then we should say so explicitly – “we don’t care about your comfort, toots! Nut up or shut up!” On the other hand, if we do care, then… Read more »
Concerning Elevatorgate, in case you don’t already know about it, I think the following post by James Onen is the most complete and unbiased analysis of the entire incident:
http://freethoughtkampala.wordpress.com/2011/09/15/elevatorgate-part-2-the-failure-of-skepticism/
It’s impressive how, in the comments section, people manage to respond to such a detailed post with accusations of ignorance. I completely approve of the label “free from thought blogs” or simply “baboon board”.
I do have to say, that after having “Seen” with my own eyes and “Heard” with my own ears the events of Elevator gate from Rebecca “Skepchick” Watson herself – I wonder exactly what all the Brouhaha has been about. I have also been quite shocked by the information that she (Rebecca “Skepchick” Watson) is disabled and has “Prosopagnosia” – a cognitive impairment which means she is unable to recognise or recall faces. So, that makes it all about Disability and bugger all to do with rape, rapists – or any thought experiment derived from a cat in a box… Read more »
Hmmmm….. As much as I hate it when white people use anti-black racism as a cudgel with which to beat other people, I can understand the conundrum as it is expressed. And….. The other point I want to make here, which goes back to my objection to anti-black racism being used as a rhetorical device by those who will never face it, is that black people engage in tons of behaviours to make white people feel safer. We do this all the damn time. We make accommodations in speech, behaviour, dress, mannerism, [and] conversation topic – a wide diversity of… Read more »
Fortis, you posed a number of pertinent questions. I think there is a simple answer that will make a sweeping nullification of all of them: Women are special. I realize that they are not going to come out saying that directly. But that is nonetheless what it all comes down to for them. They will go to the most absurd intellectual contortion to avoid giving that answer in those words. It’s quite amusing really. One of their favorites in this particular discussion is shifting the goalposts. They make it about general courtesy. “After all, being mindful of other people’s feelings… Read more »
Well now hang on just a moment…the “it’s about courtesy” argument isn’t some sort of nefarious argument tactic. I don’t agree that men should be asked to behave in special ways when around women to avoid being perceived as a rapist…that’s just ridiculous. I do think we should all behave respectfully and courteously around each other.
@ Heather, “the “it’s about courtesy” argument isn’t some sort of nefarious argument tactic. ” I never said it was “nefarious”. It’s simply wrong because courtesy is not what this is about. It’s about demanding special courtesy towards women from men – which is chivalry, not courtesy. It’s like those women who demand that a man open doors for them. When you ask why, they say it’s courteous. That would only have credibility if they’d also demand women hold doors for men (and any other combination). “I don’t agree that men should be asked to behave in special ways when… Read more »
“One can be courteous AND not be a sexist. ”
Actually, for men this is nearly impossible in the eyes of others. Not being a sexist will inevitably get you into trouble with women (and men) on a regular basis – because of this demand for chivalry. Any man who has tried to treat women the same way he treats men can confirm that.
Mate, that is one sweeping generalization. As I said, we must be spending our time with completely different kinds of women…because I don’t know any woman that wants a man to be chivalrous.
I know very few women who don’t. I have even heard many feminists contort themselves to debate as to why chivalry and equality are not mutually exclusive. I have no problem with chivalry (traditional male to female), but it certainly is not equality.
“I have even heard many feminists contort themselves to debate as to why chivalry and equality are not mutually exclusive. ”
Sadly this is true. They typically say things like “I’m all for equal rights but I don’t want men and women to be the same”. That’s fine until you realize what exactly they’re referring to that “should” be different and we’re back to regurgitating the double standards – that conveniently always put the burden of fulfillment on men.
Most of them don’t even notice their double standard. That’s the whole point about being entitled. They don’t have to notice it. To them, it’s perfectly fair and normal to demand something they never intend to do themselves. I don’t fault or blame them for it. It’s the result of how they are treated by men. This is not something I arrived at from some little circle of friends I “hang around” with. I’ve lived in several different countries and visited dozens more. If there is one constant I have encountered then it’s a double standard for the behavior of… Read more »
Spoken as an overweight male that was obese I can guarantee you there is heavy pressure on men to be slim, weight is one of the biggest insecurities men have! The toned strong body still means they desire being slim.
It’s always made me dumbfounded that some assume women are under more pressure with their looks and body when it’s not like men are given much leeway, if you’re fat you’re seen as lazy, gluttonous, if you’re skinny you’re seen as weak, if you’re muscly you’re seen as a good body but can also be seen as a meathead.
“It’s like those women who demand that a man open doors for them. When you ask why, they say it’s courteous. That would only have credibility if they’d also demand women hold doors for men (and any other combination).” We really must be hanging around different types of people, because I know of no woman who wants a man to hold open a door for her, and doesn’t expect another woman to do the same (or who wouldn’t hold open a door for another woman or a man). In fact, I was raised that’s what you do…you hold open doors… Read more »
I’d agree that it’s a good thing to behave courteously but in this case I wonder at what cost that comes. But I also think the courtesy argument in this case is a bit of a Red Herring. With regards to opening doors, it’s one thing if you open doors for both sexes (egalitarian) and quite another if you open doors for only one sex (sexist) because that other sex to whom you do not open doors is seen as the weak and frail part of the species or what have you. Likewise, when a woman sees a strange man… Read more »
For anyone who hasn’t encountered the so called freethoughtblogs yet, the name is to be taken with a massive heap of salt. Now to the post itself: Your proposition for every single man to accommodate all women’s feelings has a fundamental flaw on one side, and is decidedly sexist on the other side. Since you pointed out the sexism yourself, I will skip right to the flaw: You are suggesting men take responsibility, not just for their own actions, but for other people’s feelings – random strangers on top of everything else. The flaw in this is based on two… Read more »
I answer the idea of Shroedinger’s Rapist with Shroedinger’s False Accuser. For some reason men feel they have to defend themselves from the slings and barbs hurled at them by some women who hold irrational fears about their safety. For whatever reason, men – all of us, have either actively supported, or stood by apathetically, while ridiculous fears are made as important as established fact, even encouraging emotion to eclipse reason. The false statistics are presented by a minority of women, primarily feminists; unfortunately they are believed by a larger group of fearful, gullible women. Just because a woman fears… Read more »
This is not nearly said enough.
Both men and women on average LOVE painting women as helpless vulnerable victims. It goes deep down into human sexuality and there is no way that will change. But what we can do is at least be aware of this bias and point it out in such discussions. Just saying “some men make women afraid” is ignoring a whole lot of other things that are making women afraid – things that individual men have no control over.
No one will read all these comments. But I urge anyone who does to read Gavin de Becker’s GIFT OF FEAR. We all have natural instincts that tell us when “something isn’t right.” We dismiss these feelings because we don’t “want to hurt a strangers feelings” or be “seen as a racist.” Next thing you know, you’re innocent Channon Christian, dying after hours of sexual torture. Gavin de Becker says to dismiss those rationalizations. Trust your feelings and protect yourself. Don’t worry about being Politically Correct. Most of these commenters are spouting political nonsense. de Becker says to dismiss that… Read more »
You can call me No One.
It’s pretty fine being white. You don’t have to deal with all that rapist stuff. Women only tend to believe that black men are inherently evil. They’re often quite relieved to see a white male. We don’t have to make adjustments or do anything, the colour of our skin is enough.
It’s pretty fine being white. You don’t have to deal with all that rapist stuff. Women only tend to believe that black men are inherently evil. I call BS on this. As a 6’3″, 250# (on a good day), rugged looking white male, I have had white women engage in avoidance behaviors similar to those described by this black author. Including running in fear at the sight of me. I’ve also been stopped and questioned by cops on 3 occasions when I was doing nothing wrong. And I was even refused service at a Dennys for no discernable reason —… Read more »
“It is not “sexist” for women to view all men as potential rapists, because (other than in prison) men possess the privilege of being subject to a vanishingly small likelihood of being raped by either men or women, while women are subject to a substantial likelihood of being raped by men. ” This is not true. I submit to you the following analysis of the CDC’s 2010 NIPSVS survey: http://www.genderratic.com/?p=836 And the results of this independent study: http://feck-blog.blogspot.com/2011/05/predictors-of-sexual-coercion-against.html?spref=fb Both show parity across genders as both victims and perpetrators of sexual violence. Your “excellent observation” is relaying false data produced by… Read more »
wellokay
Problem with your stranger vs. known is that we usually can take steps to avoid the known bad guys. We have at least some control.
We have no control over the folks we encounter in public.
And, as it happens, we were talking about not frightening people we encounter in public.
So far most of what I’ve read here is about “stranger danger,” as it were. If we really wanted to be consistent about reducing danger, and if we really wanted to be in tune with the statistics about rape and other forms of assault, we should be most wary about our family, friends, and coworkers, not strangers on the street. How many people have been victims because they never would have thought ___ could do such a thing? You could stay home instead of walking down the street, but then you would pose (statistically speaking) a threat to everyone else… Read more »