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
About Crommunist
Peter. Their fears, rational or not, are not your responsibility. I feel it is my responsibility to act so as not to increase, or spark, those fears, rational or not.
For example, before I retired, I used to take power walks in the evening. My math tells me I was doing a steady 4mph, which will overtake anybody who isn’t running, and looks serious. No casual ambling. During parts of the year, it would be dark by the time I got to it. If I were approaching a woman, or overtaking, I would cross the street to do so on the other side. Walking around our downtown–small town–I might get to my objective by turning right for a block, then left, instead of going straight, in order to avoid the overtake/approach. If I was not in a position to do one or another, I would yield the sidewalk–mostly a yard wide–to the woman long before it was necessary.
Some guys, like me, need to go the extra mile. As I said earlier, my granddaughter made a drawing of faces; happy, sad, angry, silly. She’s four and a half. I asked her what face I had. “Mad”, she said without hesitation. I’m big and I have good posture, which is to say I don’t emit obsequiousness. If I get on an elevator with a woman, I go to the side so I’m not behind her where she can’t see me, and I’m not between her and the door. In public places, I don’t make eye contact.
That’s enough detail. Point is, I try to avoid alarming women whether I think their fears are rational or not.
Some time ago, during a discussion on profiling men of middle eastern appearance, a guy mentioned that he did a lot of business in the UK. He had a frequent associate who was Irish and got the extra attention you’d expect. The irish guy didn’t grudge the security people their attention. He thought it was the fault of his Hibernian brethren who were trying to blow stuff up. The point was that rational men of middle eastern appearance ought to blame their violent brethren for any extra attention they got. And men ought to understand some men have made some women afraid and not blame the women.
I really appreciate this comment. I’ve never felt that the “Men Can Stop Rape” campaigns were perfect at all. I’ve felt it should be “We All Can Stop Rape” and be much more inclusive. But I also am aware that for rational or for not, some men have made some women afraid, as you say, and all of us (men and women both) need to focus on finding ways on increasing confidence and diminishing fear.
My guess is, and it’s purely conjecture, that most of us subtly adjust behavior and demeanor depending on context and circumstance. Some of it is conscious and some of it is outside of our awareness.
For instance, if I, as a woman, came across a lost child in a mall, I’d most definitely step in to help the child. I’m aware that I’d be at less risk of being accused of kidnapping, but I’d still be damn damn careful to make sure my behavior was that of “HEY I”M HELPING HERE.”
As a woman, I might change my behavior walking alone at night to appear stronger, faster, and tougher. I might try to appear less threatening at the mall with that lost child. I am serious and obedient in a security line at the airport, and I act differenlyt in a bar that I am familiar with and with friends, than in a bar alone in a new city.
We all do this and I think it’s one of the ways we all try to keep a certain peace between people. Sometimes the burden is excessive, as in the case of race or gender. So we talk about and and work on it.
One can either trust blindly, be completely paranoid, or make the best decisions possible in the moment with an attitude of cautious trust (trust as action, not as a “feeling”) and review afterward to see if one was acting with prejudice or pragmatism. Or both.
Well said. But I can’t help but feel that its a little different when you’re dealing with a non-adult like an airport security-guard or a child. Its not like they can be expected to tell the difference between someone who just looks different and someone who might present an actual threat.
Take my aunt for example: she was refused entry by US customs officials at Shannon because she had too much luggage. You couldn’t write this stuff.
Nope, screw that. Middle eastern men shouldn’t get searched by airport security any more than anyone else, black people shouldn’t get stopped because they’re driving a nice car and men shouldn’t be treated as a security threat to schools. I don’t think it actually makes us safer to do these things and it ruins the lives of the thousands of innocent people who have to live with this kind of crap day in, day out.
Being treated as a potential rapist by strangers on the street isn’t what I’d call a big problem, its annoying, but its the tip of the iceberg of racial and sexist profiling that runs deep in our society and has very serious consequences for the people it hits hardest.
Statistics show that rapists are more likely to be men: Lets treat all men as potential rapists until we’re sure.
Statistics show suicide bombers are more likely to be Muslims: Lets search brown people more at airports.
Statistics show women are more likely to take paid maternity leave and subsequently quit their jobs: Lets not hire pregnant women.
Of the three examples I gave, the only prejudice being tackled with any seriousness is the tendancy not to hire women. And its the only one of the three where the person affected is actually likely to act as predicted.
On a more important note: its entirely possible that you may have to defend yourself at some point in your life against a false accusation of sexual harassment. If you do, you’ll not only be fighting the claims and physical evidence of your accuser, you’ll also be fighting the unspoken prejudice of the jurors that says that because you’re a man, you’re more likely to have done it. After all, a strange man might be a rapist, right? Better assume they are until you’re sure.
I don’t cross the street when I meet strangers at night. Its unreasonable to ask me, but not others, to alter my behaviour because I share some traits with some criminals and this forms the basis of someone else’s prejudicial fears.
Unfortunately, Peter, “shouldn’t” and “won’t” are two different things. The examples you gave above “shouldn’t” happen, but they will. Just like I, as a white male, can sit in my car on a suburban block and not get hassled by the police whereas a black colleague of mine will probably draw a squad car and a more-or-less polite inquiry about his business in the neighborhood (a real-life situation). The question, again, becomes (and I think Crommunist phrased it well, too) was that, since these are facts, what are YOU going to do about them? If you care about your neighbors, are you going to take steps to make them more comfortable? Or do you, in effect, say “Screw ‘em, they’re not entitled to their feelings because *I* don’t share those feelings?”
Which is, of course, the whole point of the original “Schroedinger’s Rapist” post, which I suggest you read. Women (read “people”), are not bound to react the way you want them to just because *you* know you’re not a threat. *They* don’t know that, and you are not entitled to their time and attention to prove it to them. They have the right to regard you as one if they so choose.
I’m a 6’3″, 250-lb guy. In elevators, I make brief eye contact, nod slightly, perhaps say “good morning,” and keep out of the way in the manner Richard describes so well. I don’t waste time blaming others if they choose to be a little nervous about me. I understand, and so I try to be as unobtrusive as possible when you’re the size of a small car.
YMMV – but if you walk around with the chip on your shoulder that says it’s “unreasonable” for others to view you as a possible threat when you share characteristics with other threats, don’t be too surprised if you continue to get negative reactions. Look around you. Spot six women. (Don’t stare.) At least one of the six has been raped or sexually assaulted before. You’re Schroedinger’s Rapist, and it’s up to YOU, not them, to decide how you want to act about it.
How would you feel if you discovered the woman you avoided like that got mugged or raped while you were darting around the corner to make her feel better? That she was attacked BECAUSE you chose to abandon her and therefore she presented an easier target to a genuine criminal out on the same night?
About the same way I’d feel if she got hit by a meteorite, David, since the odds are only a little better. You can posit hypotheticals all night, but ask the lady how she’d feel if that annoying guy keeps coming on to her and then insists that he’s only pestering her to protect her from a possible stranger rape.
If it doesn’t sound stupid phrased like that to you, you are either the problem, or you have a future moderating Presidential debates.
Good for you, Peter. I admire a strong, principled, determined man. Snort. Scaring a woman whose fears are irrational is just about as bloody-minded as scaring a woman whose fears are rational.
I see you tried to change the subject to how we “treat” people. Not the point. But nice try. Point is how you, as an individual, act.
Knock yourself out, and pat yourself on the back, too.
Sure why stop at crossing the street? Why not just avoid going out at night or leaving the house at all. I’m sure women would be much more comforted knowing you were doing your bit to erase men from the public places entirely.
If walking normally down the street is all it takes to scare someone then they need more help than I can give them.
Two issues: Peter. An irrational fear is a phobia. Would you go out of your way to not startle a person you know as a phobic with whatever is their issue? Probably not. Their problem, right?
Ref. hoodie. I was in Traverse City this weekend. At twenty degrees, sunny and no wind, I went showshoeing. I had a short-sleeved shirt, a medium weight sweater, and a hoodie. I shortly took off the hoodie.
Speaking of which, I live in west Michigan and like getting outdoors. I probably get my hood up twice a year when the wind is bad and blowing sleet or something. Otherwise it is UNNECESSARY. If a large black man chooses to wear a hoodie when the weather does not demand it, and have his hood up, he’s choosing to dress like a stereotypical thug. He’s not worried about the weather. He may be saying to himself, I dress like a stereotypical thug, one who might be getting ready to play Knockout King, but I’m not a bad guy. It’s the white people who have the problem. Riiiiight.
Survival depends on situational awareness and using stereotypes until further info is available is a survival technique. Yeah, it’s unfortunate you have to prove you’re not a bad guy, but them’s the breaks. In the meantime, give other people a break. Won’t kill you. Some of you, it might kill you not to be threatening. Enjoy.
“Two issues: Peter. An irrational fear is a phobia. Would you go out of your way to not startle a person you know as a phobic with whatever is their issue? Probably not. Their problem, right?”
An irrational fear? Like worrying that spiders are going to kill you? No, I wouldn’t go out of my way to dump spiders in someone’s bed just to terrify them. But if someone has an irrational fear of meeting a man on the street I don’t have to go out of my way to trigger their fears, all I have to do is run out of milk and need to go to the shop.
“If a large black man chooses to wear a hoodie when the weather does not demand it, and have his hood up, he’s choosing to dress like a stereotypical thug. He’s not worried about the weather. He may be saying to himself, I dress like a stereotypical thug, one who might be getting ready to play Knockout King, but I’m not a bad guy. It’s the white people who have the problem. Riiiiight.”
And he’d be damn right. I might get worried if I saw someone like that come up behind me, I might even get ready to defend myself. But I wouldn’t have the sheer gall to publicly demand all black people to cross the road when they see me just because my hindbrain engages in a little racial profiling on the side.
“Survival depends on situational awareness and using stereotypes until further info is available is a survival technique. Yeah, it’s unfortunate you have to prove you’re not a bad guy, but them’s the breaks. In the meantime, give other people a break. Won’t kill you. Some of you, it might kill you not to be threatening. Enjoy.”
What?? I’m not complaining that people are assessing me as a potential threat, that’s their perogative. I’m attacking the really screwed up idea that its my job to go out of my way to prove to them what a nice guy I am. Again, I don’t act in anything remotely resembling a threatening manner, unless by this you mean I have the arrogance to occupy the same footpath as other people.
For me, maleness does not define my wariness of someone as potential rapist/mugger/baddie.
It’s largely due to body language, appearance factors, and that “sixth sense” part of your brain that tells you something is wrong and initiates fight or flight responses. Plus, I always look at it like this: If I’m right, I can find an escape from a potential crime. If I’m wrong, the worst that can happen is that some random guy I don’t know is going to feel like he’s been “wrongly accused” of being a bad guy. I take into consideration my escape routes as well as my position, but I find myself being much more AWARE of my surroundings, simply because my body mass and muscle mass is probably inferior to the average male’s, and that’s mainly biology.
I don’t believe that men are inherently bad (and many men pose no threat, especially if they are obviously minding their own business, are dressed well and carry themselves with a relaxed and unthreatening body language), but I think that it is patently ridiculous for men to honestly think that it is unreasonable for women to simply not be uncomfortable or take precautions if she finds herself alone on the street with a group of semi-drunken loud guys coming down the street behind her. Sure, they may mean no harm, but is she willing to take that chance, especially considering that if she DOES get raped, SHE will be told AT LEAST ONCE (by family and friends even) that she SHOULD HAVE PREVENTED IT because she SHOULD HAVE KNOWN WHAT WOULD HAPPEN. When you are 100% certain that if a crime happens to you, you’re going to be told that you were an idiot or a fool for allowing you to be in the situation that was obviously unsafe (akin to leaving your doors unlocked and open with all of your valuables in plain view as “inviting” criminals to pillage your home), then you damn well need to be careful because the act of the crime itself is horrifically damaging and the aftermath must either be secret and crush you under the weight of that secret, or it becomes public and everyone’s looking at what you “should have” done to prevent it in the first place, using your experience yet again as a way to forward that email to all their female friends about “how to be safe” and “avoid rape,” through hyper paranoid behaviors.
Here where I live, we have a ton of “street people”-homeless people who are heavily entitled and will practically mug you on the street if you won’t give them money. If someone looks like that, regardless of race or even sex, I will go in the opposite direction or blast off on my bicycle. I’m not willing to chance being held up at knife point just because I wanted to give some scuzzy person the benefit of the doubt. Because I’m going to be inevitably told later that if it walks like a duck and talks like a duck that I’m a fool for expecting it to be a swan.
Chances are, if you’re a man running around in dirty messy clothes muttering horrible things to yourself and walking around with the “up to no good amble” (as my friend dubbed it), then it is reasonable to expect bad behaviors. There are other micro expressions and body language factors involved, but many of them are subtle and must be taught/learned through first hand experience. Of course, the one time I did get raped was one of those situations where I ‘let” someone who I knew had weird feelings toward me into my place, so obviously even though I overrode those feelings because we were “friends,” I still paid the price for not listening to what my knowledge of body language was telling me. Now, when my alarm bells go off, I take heed no matter whose feelings I may possibly hurt for placing them in an awkward position. Because honestly, what’s worse, someone’s hurt feelings or my bodily integrity being trampled upon?
Peter. Nobody’s demanding anything. Didn’t I already say you got busted trying to change the subject?
I think I did.
Anyway, the point is you have the opportunity to reduce others’ apprehension. It’s optional. You choose not to.
Thanks for letting us know that about you.
That’s the trouble: they are. When commentators argue that I should cross the street to pander to other people’s irrational phobias they’re making unreasonable demands. To extend that logic, should Muslims not fly on planes in case they scare americans? How wide a street should you have to cross?
I think you mentioned something like that, but since we’re still on the same subject I felt free to ignore it.
As I said before I do find myself doing things to make myself less scary, but I don’t go out of my way to do them nor should I have to.
The point is you seem to think that the victims of prejudice are responsible for dispelling the irrational fears that cause it.
Thanks for letting us know that about you.
“Anyway, the point is you have the opportunity to reduce others’ apprehension. It’s optional. You choose not to.”
As a trans person I can reduce the anxiety of transphobic people by not existing. Should I kill myself to relieve their fear that I might rape their little girls in the bathroom?
Perfect response.
The only person taking care of me – is me. Anyone else’s estimation of what my gut tells me is absolutely irrelevent to me. I will not adjust that internal sensor to make anyone feel better. It’s my life on the line.
I assure you it is not as prejudiced as some imagine…ALL men do not set off my creep meter. ALL black men do not set it off. Creepy men do. Creepy men come in all colors. What I know factually is I am most in danger from people I know already – not random people.
If I am wrong… big deal. If I am right and I ignore my gut I can get very hurt.
So whatever to all of this…especially the harranging holier than thou types here banging on about feeling misjudged. Don’t be a creep. Your unlikely to get judged that way.
What does “creepy” mean to you?
That’s the thing… It’s not something I am going to spend a lot of time outlining in a blog comment. What I am saying is that we have alarms that go off. Those alarms are given to us by evolution. A lot of women undermine those alarms in themselves trying to conform and not make a scene, not upset or offend anyone.
If a guy gets a weird feeling that he is about to be robbed…no one judges him for listening to his gut…. and EVERYONE has these gut feelings. I don’t care what color you are, what your class is – YOU have these alarms. Ok maybe in Bernard Goetz’s case his alarm was very tragically over compensated for…But I’m not talking about that. I am talking about simply trusting one’s inner compass. Sure some people have a way too sensitive alarm setting. Some people have anxiety issues that impact them beyond normal range – often because they’ve been hurt or assaulted as a kid or adult. It’s a physical thing. If my alarm goes off I am going to listen to it. None of this debate will enter my inner dialog. All I care about is that women LISTEN TO THEMSELVES. That’s all I am saying. All this discourse trying to talk women out of trusting that inner voice is garbage. It’s not about anyone else’s feelings – it’s about survival. And no one would be questioning it if I were a man saying I felt some sort of uck from another man.
@ Liz – I agree that there are, for want of a better term, internal alarms that we should all listen to. In fact, in UK military training service personnel are told to do this. If they get that gut feeling they analyse it – they listen to that “Little Voice”.
The human brain and our senses are very good at picking up signals and noticing discrepancies – It can take time for those to rise to a conscious level so they can be analysed and articulated. So in many ways it’s best to listen and act on them – think later.
Due to the Outreach work I have done over 30 years – sex workers – drug users – homeless – ex-offenders – Public Sex Venues – and more – I know the value of that Gut feeling and Little Voice. I have been trained to use them and listen and ACT! It also comes into play working with abuse survivors and assault survivors. It’s funny how you can get that Little voice telling you it all does not add up – and that can lead to uncovering extra details, or even that the person is lying and shamming to get attention. It does happen!
But the issue here in the OP is that it is suggested that we all alter our behaviours and daily lives to accommodate little voices that we have no opportunity to hear – they are not our little voices, they are other people’s. I have no control of those and no access. I am not responsible for them.
The idea has played out with some to the point where men are being told that due to statistics and some people’s views of women that men must assume that all women Have been raped by men and all women have Trauma related PTSD as a result. It’s an extreme position.
I wonder at the absurdity of it – what happens when a woman who has been raped by a man and has Trauma related PTSD encounters a man who has also been rapped by a woman and he too has Trauma related PTSD?
Who gives way to who? Who has precedence?
The response to that is the “Overwhelming Trope” to provide Female Privilege and precedence in any given situation!
It’s so inhuman and even strays into the area or Abuse with Victim Blaming, Rape Denial and Rape Apologia.
In my own life I own my little voices and instincts – I don’t require others to adopt them and alter their behaviour – and I sure as hell have no responsibility for other people’s instincts and how they act.
It’s a social dance and with all dances it’s rude to step on other people’s toes – and it’s even ruder to demand you own and control all the dance floor to the exclusion of all other people who have an equal right to dance – just in case your toes get hurt.
If some demand that they be left to dance alone, that is their choice – but that choice does not mean all other people have to leave the dance floor.
Liz:
And no one would be questioning it if I were a man saying I felt some sort of uck from another man.
I think that’s at the heart of the what the OP is saying here.
For some reason we are expected to believe that only certain people allowed to have such alarms and other people are supposed to just “suck it up” and difference in whose alarms are valid and whose alarms are not seems to be simply the goups of people being represented in a given situation.
You have an alarm that goes off based on certain parameters (which are probabaly influenced by your own experiences). What makes your parameters valid and someone else’s invalid or vice versa?
Apparently a man triggering a woman’s alarm is okay, a woman triggering a man’s alarm may or may not be okay, a man triggering a man’s alarm is okay, a white person triggering a black person’s alarm may be be okay, a black person triggering a white person’s alarm is not okay, a poor person triggering a rich person’s alarm is not okay….etc….
I’m willing to accept that (barring some real evidence of prejudice) anyone’s alarm is valid. but there are a lot of people who seem to want to pick and choose and dictate to other people which one’s are valid and which ones are prejudice based on nothing more than what groups are represented in the situation.
I agree with your ideas and point.
There is a *BIG* difference between a person’s individual alarm bells helping them feel like they can make actions in order to feel safe and institutionalizing oppressive rules or laws to disadvantage an ENTIRE GROUP of people based on phenotype.
Example of personal alarm: I see a black guy walking down the street with his hand in his jacket in a way that it looks like he might be holding a gun. He is also muttering slurs about me (“bitch,” “slut”, etc) and is exhibiting other threatening body language that makes me feel like I should get away.
This example is of a SPECIFIC BEHAVIOR that is being exhibited by a SPECIFIC INDIVIDUAL. This says NOTHING about how I view black people in general, or men in general, but when certain behaviors intersect within one person, I have no reason to compromise my feelings of safety.
Example of institutionalized discrimination: People start passing laws to automatically arrest black people for being on the street walking around after dark.
This hypothetical discriminatory law takes unrelated physical appearance as the REASON for criminal behavior and instead does a disservice to an entire group of people who are generally NOT criminals.
There is a huge difference that many of the commenters (not you, specifically) seem to be taking offense at- the difference between interpersonal relations on the individual level and sociopersonal relations on a macrosocial level.
So yeah, it’s totally fine for an individual to feel uncomfortable or angry, etc. It’s NOT totally fine to discriminate or legislate against entire populations of people based on physical appearance.
I think you’re referring to stereotypical hoodlum behaviour? Which can be triggered by white, black, any colour. There are negative associates with having a hoodie up, certain styles of clothing, gangsta rap promotes it. If you don’t actually live within that area/culture, you probably won’t understand it fully and from the outside it can look quite intimidating. We have that hear with bikies, people can mistake some groups of bikies for being the criminal element and get fearful around them, even though it could be the group of older bikers who just do sunday drives for fun and do toy runs etc.
Perception is everything, it’s quite normal to fear based on perception but it doesn’t make it right. I use to fear certain groups that reminded me of bullying, I hated being near high school students and was defensive near them, if I heard a group laugh I felt like shit because it triggered traumatic memories. It wasn’t until I learned later that most people aren’t even thinking of you on the street, they’re usually too caught up in their own stuff that I started to feel safer. Those highschool kids could be giving me shit, or they could just be having a laugh at something totally unrelated and not even realize I am there. What we perceive isn’t necessarily right or wrong, that inner voice can be handy but it’s only a guide. Negativity can infect it and cause that inner voice to trigger way too much, and for some it becomes overwhelming like it did for me and I ended up with a social anxiety disorder from it.
It’s not about hoodlum behavior- it’s about how I perceive someone on the street or even in the company of others. If they make me feel unsafe, I’m not going to hesitate to remove myself from the situation. Honestly, I don’t know what’s so hard to comprehend here. When something bad happens to a woman because she trusts a guy who looks like he’s up to no good, she gets told “well, you SHOULD HAVE KNOWN.” Yet, if she listens to that gut feeling that something is wrong (even if said guy is scrawny and white and not “thuggy” at all), she’s also given shit from people for being “discriminatory”!
You know what I think? I think that making someone else feel bad < me being put in a situation where I feel unsafe and may actually be physically attacked.
The one time I actually WAS raped was by a guy I knew well (as most rapes happen) He was half my size but he knew aikido and he was very good at holds. We had dated in the past but stayed "friends" even though he still obviously liked me. I kept being assured by him (and other friends) that it would be "ok" to be around him at a specific event, even though I felt skeeved out and weird. After the rape, I cut him out of my life and didn't seek legal justice because there was just too much bullshit that would be pulled out into the light (we'd had a past relationship that had involved sex a few years before, I had willingly gone to the gathering, I was not drunk but I think he was under the influence, etc).
So now, as far as I'm concerned, some random person on the street or even someone I know well feeling inconvenienced or having hurt feelings because I feel threatened and need to remove myself from the situation is not worth it.
Thinking of someone else's POTENTIAL FEELINGS is less important to me than MY SAFETY. And chances are, if someone I know won't respect my feelings on the matter, chances are they don't actually care about me as an individual. In which case, they don't need to be in my life.
Just a quick question, do you expect the other person to change to suit your fears? There’s no issue with having fears yourself, I think the issue arises when we try to make others change their behaviour to suit our own fears. Certain behaviour is probably acceptable to be changed, though I’d extend it to everyone and not a particular group of course.
My biggest concern is if we’re hyperinflating the fear and causing too much fear in people before they have been abused. There’s always risk of course but if we are in fact putting much more fear into women than they really need, does it really help? Does that make sense?
I said no such thing. I said – listen to your alarms. Everyone has them.
I didn’t say Black men running = creepy. I’ve lived in majority Black spheres, worked in majority Black spheres. I do not have those triggers. I do not think or experience Black men as creepy or particularly threatening. I don’t cling my bag closer to me when generic Black guy comes along, up to me, next to me, in an elevator with me. So please don’t hook me into that convo. I agree that Black men are very often a victim of this prejudice and it has led to lynching and other abohorrent outcomes. I can separate that from the convo – for myself – about anxieties and alarm bells…and I do.
I am saying that we all have “that little voice” and it is not really a good idea to undermine it’s authority in the moment.
If you are a person who is large and intimidating – I am 5’2″ 120 – my priority is not going to be to salve your wounded identity. I am not intimidated by all large guys. I have been intimidated by women who posed a threat to my safety. My priority is taking care of myself. I am not fear based. I do not have PTSD. I don’t walk around living in dire anxiety of being raped. But if you set off my alarm bells I will listen to that voice first and let the chips fall. I do not understand why this is controversial. This is a science blog isn’t it?
Fact is – we have those instincts for a reason.
I also don’t think anyone is trying to MAKE anyone do anything. People are saying if you are interested in maybe lessening the amount of alarms or stress others need to handle in any given day – then you might consider doing x y and z. If you don’t care to then continue on as you were and experience the world as you do. Don’t be surprised though if that doesn’t win you lots of affection from those whom you interact with. If you wonder why you don’t have a lot of say Black or women friends – Check in with yourself…if it’s only their prejudice and not your unwillingness to listen… well it’s your bed you get to sleep in it.
Using stereotypes and generalizations for a theory of a culture of fear here.
I have seen and heard discussions by women who see themselves as physically weaker than men and that men can easily overpower women to the point some feel women are defenseless. One of the saddest things in life is that women seem to be trained to be physically weak, that they have no idea of their own strength physically. From what I have heard from some women is they fear doing weight lifting because they don’t want to bulk up too much and it would affect their femininity whereas male physical strength is encouraged quite heavily in society. I’ve known of women who can knock out some men in 1 hit, who are stronger than me even and I am a large man. If men and women followed similar paths in sports and had positive encouragement around strength and cardio I feel women will feel much more confident in their personal safety and might be more comfortable than they are now.
We can look at the stats on violence and abuse and there are plenty of male victims with female perpetrators, so obviously physical strength advantage isn’t everything and there are other factors at play. If we only hear of women being abused by men over n over n over and the other variants of victims n perps aren’t talked about much. Would you agree that if society posted stats on females being raped only, 99% of rapists are male (a commonly said stat), whilst very little if any rape happens to men BY women (old stats did this), we could create a much elevated sense of fear of rape in women? Could we portray men as much more likely to be violent/abusive than women and that stereotype + the heavy focus in media of the stranger based rape could elevate a woman’s fear severely?
All theories, I’ve been trying to understand the various sides and groups here.
@ Archy! It starts to get absurd.
Women say they like men who are physically ripped – its sexier – more attractive – more masculine and manly!
Then you get the but women are physically weaker and men who are physically ripped – sexier – more attractive – more masculine and manly – they are frightening and we require all men to change behaviours as a result.
Am man who is Not physically ripped – Not sexier – Not more attractive – Not more masculine and manly – he is told he is sexists and even apologising for Rapists, if he does not accept the stereotypes and adapt his behaviour due to stereotypes!
It becomes clear that there is a Win – Loose strategy at play – and if you point that out you are also Sexists – Abusive – Giving Rape Apologia – etc. etc. etc. – and of course that is just yet another gambit in the Win – Loose strategy at play.
When does the stereotyping and silliness have an end? P^)
Some are so highly defended that there is little to no value in dialogue – Its the human and pig wrestling scenario – the human ends up dirty and the pig enjoys it and is ever so satisfied!
Yeah – because we are smart enough to make a distinction between someone who works out nd is very fit and a rapist or a person who feels threatening. You seem to think those are equal in our little girl brains. Don’t know why that’s so hard for ya.
Liz – it’s not hard for me – I was just pointing out a number of factors that I have actually heard being discussed – and how they actually lead to absurdity!
Absurdity leads to coping strategies and problem solving strategies that are Win-Loose!
Even Compromise does not get a look in. Of course Compromise is an Ego play and likely to collapse at the first sign of trouble, so it’s not actually a long term solution – just a stop gap measure.
I do Win-Win!
http://goodmenproject.com/ethics-values/heresy-rape-statistics-and-getting-away-from-the-poles/comment-page-1/#comment-93033
Yeah – kinda not interested in this abstract “win-win” that is out there in the ether somewhere. My safety is my subjective sense and instinct. You are not part of that in any way unless I experience you as a threat. If I experience you as a threat – I don’t really care about your concerns with regard to having a “win”
We’re having two conversations here.. one about the real and one about the theories in your heads. I don’t feel a need to convince you of my point of view. You should know you have having no luck doing that with me.
I trust myself.
I find it fascinating that all the discussion of instinct is about threat and about danger.
It also has a very positive side too!
I do Win Win – because I listen to both the positive and the negative – I don’t frame my personal instincts as just being on the Dark Side!
I remember a line from Lord Of The Rings when Frodo first meets Strider/Aragorn –
Frodo: ‘I think that one of his (Saurons) spies would – well, seem fairer and feel fouler’
‘I see,’ laughed Strider. ‘I look foul and feel fair. Is that it? All that is gold does not glitter……’
I have met so many who looked Foul and were in fact Fair – and even in the deepest night. I don’t limit myself to just one polarity!
And I’m glad too – because one night one Foul Looking Guy was the only one who came to help as I was threatened with a knife! That Foul looking guy who I had gone with my gut on – the street homeless guy who people pissed on as he slept on the streets – he was the Guy who showed just how fair he was! So many walked by looking ever so fair and all of them were foul!
It’s not about being in your head – it’s about being in your life! P^)
If some are afraid they should act on it – but they should also not be so afraid that instinct is lost and they loose the positive too! That’s Loose-Loose and I don’t play that game, and I don’t support others in such inhuman folly!
Liz, is the theory I posted good or bad, right or wrong? I truly am wondering if we raise women to feel more vulnerable and men to feel more invulnerable? I would guess this puts a much larger fear into women. Would knowing your own strength make you more comfortable? If women knew women were victims and perpetrators of violence and abuse at significant levels each instead of the stereotypical men = perp, women = victim, would that lower the fear in women? When I realized I could defend myself in an attack, I felt a bit more at ease and had less fear, I am wondering if others feel that too?
Sorry, but for way too many people a big black man running = “creepy”. For you to say don’t be creepy is like saying don’t be big, black, male or EVER run!
In fairness, we don’t know that. Her definition of creepy might be alot more reasonable. Like don’t go out walking wearing nothing but a trench-coat or don’t have a face like Steve Buscemi
Yeah no. Not what I said. And not what I mean.
Mediahounds post pretty much sums up my position: I have no problem with you listening to your little alarm bells. I have them too. They’ve gotten me out of trouble before and I value them.
The only point at which I have a problem is when commentators like Crommunist and Richard Taylor argue that its my responsibility not to ring anyone else’s alarm bells. I’m tall, I’m heavy, I’m pretty strong, I can see how these things would intimidate someone else. There also isn’t much I can do to change these things. if I met me I’d probably be intimidated. But if I met me I wouldn’t expect my twin to cross the street in order to make me feel safer. I’d expect my twin to keep walking, while I do whatever I need to do to keep myself safe.
Don’t be surprised if they do though… and maybe it’s not just your size but something else about you. My alarms are not set off by generic big guy. Try not to take all of this so personally. It’s NOT ABOUT YOU!
I won’t be
I’ve a funny feeling we’re actually on the same page on this.
Having lived for many years both in the whitest burbs and very black city neighborhoods – the fear really isn’t a constant factor – it’s triggered NOT by big black men in hoodies nor just anyone approaching. It’s an internal alarm and I am not going to second guess it based on all this bullshit.
Since you bring up alarms…everyone hates the owner of the car which beeps all night long for every little thing. This article is about the overly sensitive (paranoid) not about those who are rationally safe.
You do not get to determine who is “overly senstitive” – It’s their subjectivity. Their life.
Exactly. It’s their subjectivity, their life AND their responsibility.
Good for you, the ire is more directed at the people who are triggered only by black men (or only by men) and expect them to make up for this.
I’m sure you’re a good person
schala. It’s a free country.
Did you just invite someone to commit suicide because some people might be afraid of her? O.O
I’m sure you weren’t serious, but that’s a pretty screwed up thing to say.
If a woman wants to dart out into traffic to avoid having a Black man pass her then that’s on her. It’s incredibly considerate for someone to be aware that this could happen and place the mental comfort of others before their own priorities. It shouldn’t be a requirement though.
Also, it cannot be said enough that there are more White criminals than Black criminals. There are about 200 million White people in the USA and 38 million Black people. If 50% of the Black people were criminals and 10% of the White people were criminals there’d still be 1 million more White criminals than Black criminals.
Sexism and racism aren’t really things I feel comfortable being considerate about. But as above, I’m guilty, I shuffle my shoes too.
True, but if those figures were true then meeting a white person means that there’d be a 10% chance they’re a criminal, whereas meeting a black person there’d be a 50% chance. It would still make “sense” to be more afraid of the black person.
In reality of course the chances of that person (black or white) being a violent criminal is less than 1%.
Bad math = bad thinking.
“True, but if those figures were true then meeting a white person means that there’d be a 10% chance they’re a criminal, whereas meeting a black person there’d be a 50% chance. It would still make “sense” to be more afraid of the black person.”
That follows (though I hope everyone understands that those percentages are a complete lie. Maybe the “if” and “were” parts of my comment were ignored), but the common misunderstanding I responded to was that there are more Black criminals than White. By using absurd numbers I showed that there are almost certainly more White criminals than Black. Don’t confuse the two.
I’m not sure if this is still true with never-ending welfare reform, but the Black people you meet are more likely to be on welfare than the White people you meet (depending on geography and situation), but most welfare is paid out to White recipients. It’s not even cloaked anymore that politicians are talking about Black/Brown people when they talk about too many people using welfare and not working. Yet the cuts end up hurting many more White people. I’m always surprised that working class and lower middle class White people can’t see this.
Also the OP said criminals, not violent criminals. I’m certainly not afraid of “criminals”. That percentage is going to be higher than 1%.
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 in your house. Statistically, you might actually be less threatening if you stayed *away* from home. So, where does that leave us?
It’s not just the assumption that some people who look a certain way are more dangerous than other strangers. The biggest exaggeration in people’s fear is not about gender or race, but in the focus on strangers as the biggest threat. That’s still a big blind spot.
I think we’re also fooling ourselves to believe that you can just tell by the way someone looks about whether that person is a threat. Seriously — “dressed nicely” means that person’s not threatening? You mean wearing a shirt and tie like Ted Bundy?
There is such a thing as size-ism. As a tall person I generally benefit from it more than it hurts me (tall privilege?), but it does make me more scary than an average-height person, all other things being equal. I suspect that taller men are actually LESS likely to be violent than average height or short men, but that may just be my own bias.
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.
“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 allowing cultural biases to trump open minded investigation and proselytized by vultures who rely on a culture of fear and discord.
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 — right around the time that Dennys was in a national controversy over refusing to serve blacks!
I don’t have statistics or studies, and I’m not sure it’s really possible to design an objective study to verify/refute this, but I do know, anecdotally, that FOR SURE at least SOME of the things blacks attribute to “racism”, are just the ordinary slings and arrows of life, which hit white people also.
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 clutter and listen to your instincts.
You can call me No One.
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 an event doesn’t make it statistically likely.
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.
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 key factors:
1) Feeling this way or that, is a decision on the part of the person with the feelings. As such, it is this person who ultimately controls and is therefore responsible for those feelings. The best you can do is influence somebody’s feelings, but even that is only possible if they allow it which is also a decision on their part.
2) Because we’re talking about random strangers, you are essentially expecting men to read minds. Because everybody is different, and has a different perception of what is unsettling. I’ve had women complain that I was not paying enough attention to them. The point is, you can NEVER get this right for everyone unless you can read minds and even then, you’re doomed to fail if you encounter several people who have contradictory feelings towards the same behavior on your part.
The consequence of following your suggestion (aside from misogynistically treating women like infants) is that there is no point at which one can declare oneself a man who successfully avoids upsetting women. Even if the most rigid demands are met, there will always be another. If you start crossing roads to avoid passing a woman on the same pavement, next you’ll have to avoid the road entirely (what if a woman is on the other pavement? She’ll think you’re coming for her.). If you don’t talk to a woman in an elevator, next you won’t even be welcome using the same elevator. And so on. Even if you think there will be some “reasonable” limit, who decides that limit? And then, you’ll find yourself caught on the opposite end: Some women will be offended if you cross the road to avoid them and then you failed at accommodating them. You’ll even get the same woman making those opposing demands based on who the man is (if he’s attractive or not) or even just based on her current emotional state (since you’ve freed them of responsibility of their emotions, they need not account for them).
In light of this, I suggest you take your abstruse and sexist ideas back to the free from thought blogs where you’ll get a nice pat on the head from your supervising feminist.
““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”
This shows your true colors. And this, fellow readers is typical for the freefromthoughtblogs.
Hmmmm…..
And…..
So because certain people feel uncomfortable around you due to the fact that you are black, it is okay to then, in turn, use those same anti-black sentiments to justify your behavior? So anti-black racism can be used to justify changing ones, a black persons or a man’s, behavior to make others feel more comfortable but can’t be used against Schroedinger’s Rapist? Maybe I don’t quite get your argument but if you really are saying that it’s okay for men to use women’s fear of men in general to alter their (men’s) personal behavior, then why wouldn’t it also be a justification to put an end to stereotyping men? How do men changing their behavior alter women’s perceptions of them? If so, then this seems like a case of Special Pleading.
Huh? This is a Non Sequitur. How does women’s likelihood of being raped relate to prison rape and, furthermore, what does that have anything to do with a heuristic which women walk around with in their minds?
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 is courteous so why would you not do that? Are you a rude person?” So you’re put on the defensive for a completely different point than when you started.
Another favorite is to bait and switch you into a discussion about rape. Then they tell you about the humungous rape statistics (appeal to numbers) and how horrendous rape is (appeal to emotions) and “a little courtesy” is justified when it helps reducing the risk of rape. That way, you suddenly find yourself labeled a rape apologist. Only that they constructed a Himalaya of logical fallacies in order to get you into that corner. But since rape is so bad, who cares about a few little details?
Despite this, we must never stop trying to expose the frauds for what they are.
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 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.”
The two arguments don’t contradict one another. You’re not telling us why or even if you think that argument is valid. One can be courteous AND not be a sexist. But the “it’s about courtesy” argument is essentially saying you have to be sexist in order to be courteous.
“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 men and women which consistently puts the man on the receiving end of demand.
Some people will point out that there are also examples that work to women’s disadvantage and mention physical appearance. But they forget that men have this too just not in the same area. Sure, the pressure on men to be slim is negligible compared to how it is for women. But try dating as a man under average height and you’ll meet the most ruthless dismissal imaginable and, unlike weight, you can’t change your height.
So is this generalizing? Sure. I know not everyone is like that. But these are definitely mass phenomena, not just some crazy fringe cases. And again, any heterosexual male with some experience can pretty much confirm this. And also I’m probably not exaggerating when I say that most heterosexual men would happily lose the right to vote and 30% of their income if it meant some kind of equal valuing of their gender in the areas where it really matters – namely in their relationships with the women in their lives.
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 for people, regardless of your gender or their gender.
I think a lot of women who talk about courtesy with regards to interactions with strangers do believe it goes both ways. I don’t know if it was this article, or another, but I was talking about how often I’ll avoid talking to strangers or be a bit flustered when a stranger talks to me on a bus or train or whatever, and it has nothing to do with their gender or race. It’s just about the way that our society deals with meeting unknown people…we tend to give people their distance and respect personal space.
I’m sure some people have a double standard when it comes to the ways men and women should behave courteously with each other. But I just wanted to point out that when people bring up the “it’s about courtesy” argument, they aren’t necessarily employing a double standard. Sometimes what they’re saying is – no it’s not about assuring women you’re not a rapist; it’s about being courteous (whether you’re a woman or a man).
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 on the street it could be that she is just afraid or anxious around strangers in general and the fact that she sees a man isn’t what causes the anxiety. However, if it is the trait of maleness which is the cause of the anxiety then one has to wonder why (well fear of strangers can also be problematic but that’s not necessarily what this is about). What is it about maleness that causes her to act the way she does? Ultimately it comes down to that she has an idea in her head that males/men are/can be violent/malicious and that she doesn’t know this particular man therefore it is best to avoid that particular man. The problem there is that is an overreaching generalization when she does it, not just to one man, but every single strange man she meets in her life or even the vast majority of men that she meets. That is definitional of a stereotype, something which it would be hard to argue you are egalitarian if you hold. I’ve read several blogposts all like this one and all pretty much saying the same thing with very few variations. I am pretty much left to conclude that it is as Adi has said that there is in fact a case of Special Pleading for women going on here.
This topic seems to come up more and more recently especially with things like Elevatorgate which raged all over the internet a while back. Exactly how does treating every man like he was a potential rapist actually help women? Is there any evidence at all that it does? That’s not berating women at all, that’s attempting to find the root cause of rape. How do we get more women involved in the skeptical community? I don’t know to be quite honest. Do we want women to be more comfortable? Yes and I would add that everyone should want to maximize comfort and minimize discomfort not just solely for one sex but for everyone involved. What if making women more comfortable comes at a cost of making men less comfortable? How does one go about solving that problem? Does one simply elevate the value of one sex’s feelings over another? How would that not be sexism? Perhaps there is no solution at all to this problem. So to distill it down to a simple question: Do we want a movement where half of its population sees men first and foremost as beasts/monsters? Or is there a better approach? Skeptics and freethinkers ought to be thinking about this issue deeply and what it means not just for women but for everyone involved.
On a side note, freethoughts blogs is a joke by now. Before the eruption of Mount Elevatorgate, I used to freely browse, read, and enjoy much of what was written on there. After all the hullaballoo I don’t think it has earned the title of “freethoughtsblog” with all the witch hunts and back and forth that went on.
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 with Cyanide – uncertainty or the mechanics of Quantum Rape alla Schroedinger !
The way it has been portrayed by some is such a wonderful example of Modern Art, with an abstract metaphor rendered in multiple media …. and with three noses.. and a multi million price tag – that gets devalued when some recognise it’s real world value!
Art – Indeed! P^{
I could not possibly entertain any conversation with any person who even mentions Elevator gate and considers it a valid subject around gender – sex – feminism – men’s rights…. or even an April Fools Prank!
It reminds me of nothing other than an ill judged rant by a certain blogger (Or should that be Flogger) who saw no value in Habius Corpus and due process… and spilled bile across the blogsphere (so promptly removed, due to apolitical embarrassment) concerning a few white boys who were at Duke University…. for Political Capitol.
I was most sceptical in the analysis of matters around Elevator gate until I saw the video made by Rebecca “Skepchick” Watson – at which point it was a self evident No Brainer that the subject of Elevator gate is far less than a Storm In A Teacup – and perpetuating any continued reference to the None Subject would simply be an insult to any dead bovine that featured in Bone China Cups!
I don’t waste me Earl Grey, Lapsang souchong or Fortnam & Mason best Orange Pekoe for anyone! 8^0
I have to say – that video has made me loose respect for so many, who wrote, blogged and Italicised so much on what has been from the start a none subject! How I wish I had seen that Video earlier – and more to the point knew of the Protagonists Disability!
And please do consider that as a Disposable Person and Disability Rights Advocate, I do have great sympathy for Rebecca “Skepchick” Watson – but no sympathy for those who have “Exploited” her and reality for their own ends – and that even includes Rebecca “Skepchick” Watson herself.
Exactly how does “I hope you don’t take this the wrong way, but I would like to talk you more on the subject ….” lead to being sexualised, and lead some to espouse the view that all men are to be seen as rapists and not to get in an elevator with a lone woman…. and all because one person has an impairment that means they can’t recognise a face and with that a person – and therefore recall if they have spoken to them previously or not?
The exploitation of this NONE subject arising from disability by so many is Contemptible!
My mind runs – at great speed – to section 16 of the UN Convention “Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities”:
“1. States Parties shall take all appropriate legislative, administrative, social, educational and other measures to protect persons with disabilities, both within and outside the home, from all forms of exploitation, violence and abuse, including their gender-based aspects.
&
5. States Parties shall put in place effective legislation and policies, including women- and child-focused legislation and policies, to ensure that instances of exploitation, violence and abuse against persons with disabilities are identified, investigated and, where appropriate, prosecuted.”
“…. including their gender-based aspects!” I see a great deal of exploitation of gender and disability – and all of it aimed very deliberately against men!
I see that in some states parties need to address the Education of many as to the nature of Exploitation – and just how Anti Social and abusive such exploitation really is!
The exploitation of what is in fact a disability issue for Political Capital and Blog Linked revenue warrants close investigation!
I do hope that some Elevator users don’t take my evidently presumptuous use of public space as a threat to their person – and I still wonder how the whole mess and insanity around Elevator gate ever got linked to PTSD and the representation of so many women, by other women, on a global scale as needing to be viewed by all men as neurotic quivering wrecks?
Exploitative of Disability by any chance?
And … given the hot air created, I am now sure that Global Warming and catastrophic climate change is unstoppable – due to Ill judge, inane and even insane blogging that uses more fossil fuel than a Chinese Smelter producing the pipe work for a transcontinental Oil Pipeline!
Schrodinger’s rapist in deed?
How about Schrodinger’s Exploiters – and just who should be in the Box with the Cyanide?
} P^)
Wow talk about enlightening. That was a very good post.
Adi’s link above I mean.