Dear Feminist Movement,
When you discuss male privilege, stop saying “men are overwhelmingly less likely to be raped,” “men don’t have to deal with disbelief of their rapes” or, God forbid, “men can’t be raped.”
The largest study of the number of men who have been raped is the National Violence Against Women Survey, which you may recognize as the source of the “1 in 33 men have been raped” number. Unfortunately, the National Violence Against Women Survey asked people if they had ever been penetrated with their consent, but did not ask people if they had ever been enveloped without their consent. That’s right: according to NVAWS, a cis woman cannot rape a man with her vagina.
An erection is not consent, any more than lubrication is consent. Saying yes is consent. NVAWS is, as far as we know, massively undercounting the number of male rape survivors.
Given the methodological problems with other estimates of how many men have been raped (they generally have small samples of college students), we essentially do not know how many men have been raped.
And that’s where the whole “people don’t disbelieve men!” thing comes in. In most people’s minds, there is a Real Rape– a virtuous, straight, white cis woman, not dressed like a slut, who had a stranger jump out of the bushes at her and rape her, while she fought him off and sustained injuries. Everyone opposes that kind of rape. However, it is somehow Less a Real Rape, somehow Kind Of The Survivor’s Fault, if the survivor was promiscuous, or queer, or Hispanic or black, or a sex worker, or trans. Or if the survivor wore skimpy clothing, or got drunk, or flirted with the rapist, or was too frozen with fear to respond, or was threatened into submission, or dissociated in denial. Or if the rapist was the survivor’s girlfriend, or boyfriend, or spouse, or fuckbuddy, or pickup at a club, or friend.
Or if the survivor was male.
So when you put down “rape” on your list of disadvantages of being female, you are supporting rape culture.
Stop it.
Sincerely,
Ozymandias.
P.S. Commentariat, you are allowed to criticize feminists on this thread. Run wild.
We as men need to realize that women are raped much more than men. That said, this article has good points. Men are raped as well, sometimes by women. Also, abuse in general isn’t just physical, many times mental and often with no penis involved.
I realize I’m probably resurrecting something long dead here but I’m new here and felt like contributing. @G – “I believe most people who commit crimes do so because they feel that have justifiable reasons (from Illegal Immigration to people who hustle drugs or mug others to Hitler). The scenario you are putting forward is credible-but it’s not a unique instance of psychological criminal behavior. People act in ways that they feel are right even if it seems obviously wrong to the rest of us. So what I mean is that we can extend that train of thought to all… Read more »
I have a better idea, Ozy. It has gotten pointless and boring anyway, and as you point out, is way off topic.
Unless someone comes up with a half-decent explanation about what shit tests have to do with the feminist movement’s problematic language around rape, might I suggest that you guys take this to the Open Thread?
I have a post in moderation.
AB, that’s a good summary of our two differing uses of the term.
poke
AB: “I have a boyfriend” isn’t a shit test. It’s an insincere rejection if she wants him to pursue, or possibly a (depending on if true or not) lame excuse if she doesn’t. What do you mean by “co-dependent”? As for your last two questions: If a guy is “acting” then he is consciously doing something is he not? If he “ends up falling for” a woman who is different from the others he has dated that might mean he respects her ability to have boundaries even if he wasn’t particularly “testing” in any way, shape, or form the other… Read more »
“My point is tthat it is I can’t make any sense of your obsevation that my comments and uncalledfor’s are contradictory or inconsistent with each other.” Your definition of a shit-test is a dishonest rejection where the woman will reward the man for still chasing after her. His definition of a shit-test is a woman wanting a man to do something for her, and then rejecting him if does. Yes, they’re both of the “women are lying bitches and men are just innocent victims of their evil schemes” variety, but the concrete example Uncalledfor gave was of a woman storming… Read more »
My point is tthat it is I can’t make any sense of your obsevation that my comments and uncalledfor’s are contradictory or inconsistent with each other.
Sorry, that quote should have a ‘?’ at the end.
@Jim:
“So I have to jumpt though hoops for you to be consistent with some other person? Sorry if you want the world to be that simple for you.”
“And Uncalledfor’s definition is to appear to be interested, making promises to get a man to do something, and then dumping him for doing it. So where your definition is about making a man try harder, his definition is about making a man stand up for himself and refuse to to jump through hoops to get the woman.”
So I have to jumpt though hoops for you to be consistent with some other person? Sorry if you want the world to be that simple for you.
@Clarence: “Nope, since shit tests are a test to see if one can bully another either psychologically, physically, or sexually.” How is “I have a boyfriend” a shit test then? Also, would be fair then to say that the wish for a partner who is not co-dependant is gender-neutral? “Certain types of PUA compliance tests could be considered shit tests. Like the negative form of the “neg” for example. However PUA’s and men in general , even, are advised to “act confident” as the number one rule. That cannot be considered a shit test.” But if a shit-test is about… Read more »
I hope the young men that understand this also understand that “passing” such a test is not at all in their self-interest.
Another chance for me to recommend Miguel Bloomfontosis at Emporiasexus (who is not paying me, BTW, but probably couldn’t afford it anyway): http://emporiasexus.wordpress.com/2011/03/27/ethical-pick-up-artistry-and-the-shit-test/ It’s a short and to the point piece following on Clarisse Thorn. He mentions another classic shit-test, that of the “phantom boyfriend”; money quote: A young man begins talking with a woman at a party, and soon thereafter she mentions “my boyfriend” even though she is single. Why would she do this? … Third – and some feminists will insist this never happens – she may be testing the man to see how he reacts. An effective… Read more »
“If a man’s interest of a woman increases after she only sparingly returns his calls and make sure she’s the first to hang up when they talk, would you say his calls could reasonably be construed as shit-tests?” Nope, since shit tests are a test to see if one can bully another either psychologically, physically, or sexually. “How about when PUAs are advised to act in a certain way towards women to test their reactions before deciding which one to hit on?” Certain types of PUA compliance tests could be considered shit tests. Like the negative form of the “neg”… Read more »
@Clarence: “AB: It’s obvious you never read most of that post or you are deliberately avoiding parts of it. Nothing to say on Susan’s story about how she told the depressed football player he should stay up until he heard her favorite song? I mean, surely you’d agree THAT was a “shit test” right” Of course it’s a shit-test (at least if you use that word). Though honestly, I wouldn’t date a guy who would do that just for a picture of me either, not because guys like that aren’t manly, but because they’re dangerous. They don’t make me feel… Read more »
Clarence, on a short note, I have to say that at this present date, I havent yet bein able to meet a guy who is afraid of strong women. But I have met plenty of women who dislike that role.
I dont know, either is the “male panic” over rated or in my particular geopgraphic cultural reality is that kind og guy a rarety? who knows….
AB: Oh, by the way, I can function in 3 types of relationships: A. Equalist B. Separate spheres which I could subdivid into 1. I have more spheres where I have the final say OR 2. She has more spheres where she has the final say. In short, I’m hardly some guy who runs screaming from “strong women”, though I would say there is a difference between being self assured and standing up for ones self and being argumentative and bitchy. Nor do I need to be in a Captain /First Mate model where “my woman” is always submissive and… Read more »
AB: It’s obvious you never read most of that post or you are deliberately avoiding parts of it. Nothing to say on Susan’s story about how she told the depressed football player he should stay up until he heard her favorite song? I mean, surely you’d agree THAT was a “shit test” right, or would you rather just continue to talk about the incident that introduced that post, not the personal confession that makes up the bulk of it? After all, THAT WAS a shit test if it was anything, even though it was one at an unconscious level. As… Read more »
@Jim: “They just aren’t. Definition: Shit test – a test intended to determine how determined someone is. You seem to think it is contradictory for someone who wants a relationship with someone to reject that person. Why do you assume the rejection is always sincere? If a rejection is insincere, not a real rejection, it can easily be used as a test to dertmine somene’s determination in pursuing a relationship. In fact this is a traditional test that martial arts and spiritual masters reportedly used in the past.” And Uncalledfor’s definition is to appear to be interested, making promises to… Read more »
“Oh, and that Jim’s and Uncalledfor’s definitions were contradictory.”
They just aren’t.
Definition: Shit test – a test intended to determine how determined someone is.
You seem to think it is contradictory for someone who wants a relationship with someone to reject that person. Why do you assume the rejection is always sincere? If a rejection is insincere, not a real rejection, it can easily be used as a test to dertmine somene’s determination in pursuing a relationship.
In fact this is a traditional test that martial arts and spiritual masters reportedly used in the past.
@Clarence: “I also like how you responded to the other girl in Susan’s posts realization that she liked not being able to stomp all over the boyfriend by basically attributing false consciousness to her.” No, I took her discovery that she preferred a boyfriend who could stand up to her at face value. To quote from the post you’re misreading: “That she later found out she actually preferred it when he didn’t act clingy or needy, give her time to calm down, and didn’t escalate the conflict, doesn’t really tell us anything except that she discovered a new preference.” I… Read more »
I also like how you responded to the other girl in Susan’s posts realization that she liked not being able to stomp all over the boyfriend by basically attributing false consciousness to her. You can’t even accept women’s OWN WORDS about what they think of things if it goes against your ideology. Since you don’t do something- or so you claim- and neither do any of your friends, it must not happen ever.