[an error occurred while processing this directive]
About
Content
Store
Forum

Rebirth of Reason
War
People
Archives
Objectivism

Post to this threadMark all messages in this thread as readMark all messages in this thread as unreadBack one pagePage 0Page 1Page 2Page 3Page 4Page 5Page 6Forward one pageLast Page


Sanction: 3, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 3, No Sanction: 0
Post 20

Monday, May 2, 2005 - 8:58amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
No, Kelly, that is not what I mean.  What I mean is that I find it reprehensible that young women expect their behavior not to have consequences. 

It is the same kind of faulty thinking that would "empower" a person to walk through the ghetto with big, flashy diamonds, a fur coat, and a Louis Vuitton bag.  Should that person be able to do so?  Certainly.  Would that person get robbed?  Probably.  Did that person's lack of recognition of the environment and its occupants' behaviors contribute to the situation?  Definitely. 




Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Post 21

Monday, May 2, 2005 - 9:00amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Jennifer and Kelly - the Sun Times here in Chicago did a week-long "expose" about a month a ago on college kids and sex.  The unanimous consensus from these kids (boys and girls alike) seemed to be that sex was no big deal and just another form of recreation (like going to see a movie).  Interestingly, some older women (seniors, I guess) indicated that they were "kind of tired" of that kind of sex and were looking for more.

There seems to be a strange attitute toward sex these days.  Would it be so bad if parents taught their children to respect the opposite gender?

As for teasing being suggestive and all that - yes, Jennifer it certainly is.  As I've said, kids need to be taught better.  But young men need to be taught that even if a girl acts stupid (and yes, plenty of them do), they still have a choice.  Rape is rape, even if the femal involved is an idiot.




Sanction: 2, No Sanction: 0
Post 22

Monday, May 2, 2005 - 9:05amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Kelly, I was thinking more along the lines of: the issue is rarely discussed in terms of women who rape men. This, as I see it, is Alec's meaning behind rape as a pathology. Limiting the perpetrators to males shows a preconceived notion of what rape is and the reasons rapists rape, thus preventing a real understanding of the facts which could lead to real rape prevention. Even rape education programs say rape is not about sexuality, but power and control, yet the go on to say that men should learn that no means no? That is trivializing the issue. Granted, some men are just that dense and may indeed think a girl is really saying yes, in which case the following sex would be considered rape in that it was without one of the party's consent. However, rape as sexual assault has nothing to do with sex and everything to do with power. For example, look at prison rape (I'll readily admit that I know nothing about this and the following is purely speculation). Having a "girlfriend" in prison is a sign that one can assert power over another; force another to do what one wishes. It becomes a status symbol.

To say that all feminists are man-haters is an absurd overgeneralization. To say that all men are innocent is an equally absurd overgeneralization. These arguments are missing the point of the matter: the elimination of rape.



Post 23

Monday, May 2, 2005 - 9:11amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
As for domestic violence against women, do you really think that it exists on the same level as the occasional woman who is physically capable of browbeating a man?


Batteredmen.com

Obviously this is a biased source, and I don't know of any efforts to discredit their statistics, but it's probably worth reading nonetheless.

The statistic they cite is that every year there are 1,500,000 women and 835,000 men who are victims of domestic violence. That is, a little over 35% of domestic violence victims are male. I've seen higher ratios cited elsewhere, but those were older articles and the numbers may have been changed by more recent surveys. They give the National Institute of Justice and the Center for Disease Control as their source for these numbers.

While it's true that women are usually not as capable of causing harm with natural weapons alone, they make the point that is easily possible for them to compensate for this. They cite the same NIJ/CDC report as saying that 21.6% of male victims were threatened with a knife and 43.2% were struck with a blunt object, versus 12.7% and 22.6% respectively for female victims.

If these numbers are at all accurate, then yes, the two phenomena (male-on-female domestic violence and female-on-male domestic violence) do exist on the same level and should not be considered to be separate issues.



Post 24

Monday, May 2, 2005 - 9:25amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
But young men need to be taught that even if a girl acts stupid (and yes, plenty of them do), they still have a choice.  Rape is rape, even if the femal involved is an idiot.
I've not said otherwise.  It seems that I am being interpreted as saying rape is a woman's fault, when I am not.  I never said the man was not responsible for his actions -- I'm saying that lack of thought upon the part of the woman often contributes to the situation.




Post 25

Monday, May 2, 2005 - 10:07amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Jennifer noted:
I can't help but wonder if the translation of this is "I got too drunk to be in control of myself, and slept with some random guy, but now I'm mad..."  I've seen enough Spring Break antics to know that this is highly likely. 
Ha!  People wondered why I chose not to indulge in heavy drinking at SOLOC 4.  I rest my case.




Post 26

Monday, May 2, 2005 - 10:26amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
It is the same kind of faulty thinking that would "empower" a person to walk through the ghetto with big, flashy diamonds, a fur coat, and a Louis Vuitton bag. Should that person be able to do so? Certainly. Would that person get robbed? Probably. Did that person's lack of recognition of the environment and its occupants' behaviors contribute to the situation? Definitely.


Sure, the reality of the world presently is that if you habitually leave your doors unlocked and your windows open, you shouldn't be too surprised if you come home to find your TV missing. But at the same time, many people do think favorably of earlier eras when people did habitually leave their doors unlocked without fear, and want work for a return of those eras.

Similarly, if you dress provocatively, that will probably increase the risk of assault for you. But there's still every reason to work for a culture where a woman can walk down the street naked without fear.

I've heard similar arguments to this in other places—usually from people trying to justify traditional Catholic standards of modesty. I don't have any good counterargument, unfortunately. Still, the only way to be completely secure is to stay at home under a table in an interior room. There's a proper balance between safety and freedom that needs to be found, and an analysis of cost versus benefit to be made.

For reasons beyond the scope of this thread, there are many people who find it pleasurable to dress or act provocatively. This does increase the risk of assault to these people, and I doubt that very many of them are ignorant of that. Still, they choose to do it anyway, because the pleasure is more important to them than the increased risk. So I see no reason that we shouldn't accept provocative dress as a legitimate activity and do our best to make it as safe as realistically possible.

I agree that is prick teasing, and low and mean


And I just want to mention that I find nothing “low and mean” about “prick teasing,” and I will defend to the death a woman's moral right to show me her boobies.



Post 27

Monday, May 2, 2005 - 10:45amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I suspect that the reason no one is talks about men getting raped is that most male victims have no interest in collectivising and politicising their victimhood. Reading the responses to Alec's article, it's clear that this is exactly what at least some of these women's groups do (e.g. "The problem is male power and specifically how that power is used against those who aren’t male, or aren’t male enough or aren’t the right kind of male", Carol Mosely, co-ordinator for the Rape Education Prevention Program).

So what's the problem?





Post 28

Monday, May 2, 2005 - 10:53amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
For reasons beyond the scope of this thread, there are many people who find it pleasurable to dress or act provocatively. This does increase the risk of assault to these people, and I doubt that very many of them are ignorant of that. Still, they choose to do it anyway, because the pleasure is more important to them than the increased risk. So I see no reason that we shouldn't accept provocative dress as a legitimate activity and do our best to make it as safe as realistically possible.

Dressing and acting provocatively is pleasurable.  Of course, "provocative" is a matter of taste, and is open to vast differences in interpretation.  

I am not eschewing an ethic of modesty, to be clear.




Post 29

Monday, May 2, 2005 - 11:27amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
In my lifetime, I have seen the pendulum swing from the 50's ( 'The Great Pussy Drought", as Richard Pryor called it) through the insanity of the feminist left well described in the above article and discussion. Perhaps Solo can be the place to put things together in a reasonable manner.

Meanwhile, I'm with Phyllis Diller, who called the police one night and said,
"I'd like to report a man in my bedroom. Could you please send one up?".



Post 30

Monday, May 2, 2005 - 11:34amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Alec,

Awesome article. I particularly thought "As usual, the solution isn’t to haplessly ignore nature but to learn how to deal with it—which means emphasizing empowerment over victimhood" was important. If the PC people at the women's center were serious about preventing rape, they would have an indoor target range and lobby for concealed carry in California.



Sanction: 15, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 15, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 15, No Sanction: 0
Post 31

Monday, May 2, 2005 - 12:28pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Yep. Leftist, Marxist nutbags those Gender Studies people be. And that should have been the focus of this article. But that fact was taken away from by the tangent you went on about rape. You should have addressed the way they focus on treating it, not whether or not it happens or how often, or how a girl feels about it. If a girl is lying, she'll be found out, and she should be punished.

The issue I have with your piece, Alec, is that it seems to border on blaming girls for rape, or erring on the side of them lying or wanting to somehow deny that they were complicit somehow. And it seems like the women on here agree to an extent... yikes!

Not that I think that every girl that says she is is a rape/sexual assault victim... but a lot of them are. I'll say this: I have prudes for friends (such prudes! ;o), and at least 4 of them have experienced sexual assault... 2 of them by their older brothers' friends when they were only 12-13, 1 of them by a stepfather for about 10 years, and one of them by a stranger in a bar (he pushed her shirt up and grabbed her breasts until she was bruised... all she was doing was dancing.) They don't act like victims, but these things affect your whole life. Being raped and assaulted takes away your ability to trust or feel safe in public for a time, just like being in a bad car wreck can scare you out of driving for awhile. (One was actually afraid of penises after her rape because she was so young. She thought she was a lesbian for years, then she finally told her brother what happened... it was terrible that she could not enjoy a relationship with a man for so long.) After my experience, and what I have heard from others, I think the 1 in 4 stat is pretty valid. It could be a fluke... but I doubt it.

As a 5'4", 117 lb tiny person, I am threatened by men in certain situations, if only because I am aware of what could happen. Sorry to good guys like ya'll are I'm sure... but you talk about taking responsibility? I think we are by being wary of you. Robin Williams said, "God gave me a penis and a brain: and only enough blood to use one at a time." I agree. I don't put myself in bad situations, but I sure wish I could walk home from studying after dark instead of trying to find a parking place around here. I am not looking to victimize people... girls are not empowered enough for certain. But guns aren't the only thing that will help to fix this issue. But what Alec wrote here could be interpreted by some to mean that rape is not a serious issue: that it's been inflated. But guys need to realize that oogling my boobs or telling me I have a nice ass (I know I do, thanks. You're not gonna get to see it any faster by saying that, or by grabbing it.) is threatening. I don't dress provocatively, and I have a man (whoo hoo) so I am not out looking for any. I don't frequent the bars here because Athens is full of dangerous people. I wish I could though. I should be able to, damn it!

Jennifer, you said "lack of thought" contributed to the situation... but what about the lack of thought of the perpetrator? Should we not do something to remind guys that they need to change the way they think? Guys seem to think that I am alright (or should be alright) with them being ass grabbing, boobie oogling, lip-licking, line-using, horny droolers with hard ons... they think that is somehow... flattering to a woman. Nah. It's creepy. It's also insulting... if you want women to be "empowered", treat us like we're more than just sex toys, even if I'm wearing a short dress in a bar. I still demand respect no matter what. And take it seriously when we say we don't want you. Many don't. I don't care what I am wearing... I am not having sex with you if the first words you ever tell me are "nice ass!" And I ain't gonna like you too much either. (And Andrew, ugly cow I am not. You asked about flirting in another thread? Well... a little advice: don't call her a farm animal because she has an opinion contrary to yours.)

As far as guys getting raped, it's an issue, but it's not like it's as big an issue as women being raped by men. I think a bigger issue is straight male violence against homosexuals. Here at UGA, we have a lot of dumb, Southern, redneck frat guys, and also a large population of homosexuals. Many gay men have been beaten up, and one was dragged out into the road while he was unconscious and left to get run over by a car. The last thing he remembered? A guy asking him, "Hey! You queer?" And he answered, "Yes... why?" 

I am not a man-hater... I actually love ya'll! But you just don't know what it is like to be threatened in this way. As far as everything else... down with gender studies! It is all propagandist bullshit.




Post 32

Monday, May 2, 2005 - 12:45pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
The respones here are very interesting, indeed. But right now I'm hustling to meet a midday deadline (while dealing with heavy editorial scrutiny) for my follow-up column to this. So I'll post my response to all this tonight. (Funny: in my follow-up, I use the very same keys-in-the-car-door analogy some people here have brought up. Seems we're on the same, optimal wavelength.)

Alec 




Post 33

Monday, May 2, 2005 - 12:54pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Gender studies are not bullshit when they're actually studying gender.

I don't think it's a matter of women getting raped by men, men getting raped by women, men getting raped by men, or women getting raped by women. It's that people are raping people (and other animals, but that's another issue). So, Tim, the problem is that these types of discussions are treating the "symptoms," not the "illness."



Sanction: 6, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 6, No Sanction: 0
Post 34

Monday, May 2, 2005 - 6:15amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I'm sorry to throw a wrench in the thread, but I'm afraid I don't understand: what were you trying to accomplish with your article?  Were you simply aiming to get as many people infuriated with you as possible?

If your goal was to discredit "gender studies," perhaps examples of courses offered, required reading, and/or thesis topics from that major would have been more persuasive than simply calling it a "cootie-entrenched philosophy" and lumping together all "gender studies thinkers" as people who idolize Dworkin.  The statistic about your women's center is telling, but its impact is lessened when the next sentence seems to question the existence of date rapes.  (Did you mean that all date rapes are regrets, or merely that it is too easy for the latter to be "turned into" the former?)

Humorous and satirical columns can be brilliant, brutal, and both, but your stronger jibes are weakened by the less-ingenious name calling ("gargoyle"?).  I assume the "100 random women on campus" survey was also humorous and not meant to support a serious assertion that "The numbers at least suggest ..."?

I guess I'm just more confused than anything else.  (Hence the preponderance of question marks throughout my response.)  Perhaps it's just because I'm unfamiliar with your column's "voice," or perhaps you were just trying to generate as many letters to the editors as you could.  Or both?

But it seems to me that by blanketing your points in taunts and unspecified condemnations, you ensured that they would be lost in the flurry of hostility that you've so gleefully generated.  It seems a little sad and unnecessary, is all.

(For reference, the context of my response when I first submitted it was the original article and comments 0-7.  I ought to have expected it wouldn't be up momentarily, since I was still moderated then; sorry for the parts that became a bit of a non sequitur in the elapsed time.)

(Edited by Eve Stenson on 5/02, 3:42pm)




Post 35

Monday, May 2, 2005 - 1:23pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Sarah,

   You're right. They aren't bull when they are studying gender. I was referring to the gender studies that Alec was writing about. They do serve as mouthpieces for the leftists and Marxists. I am taking a Women's Studies class right now... the questions we are asked are loaded and biased. The teacher is an activist, not an academic. I'd say that Sociology is more of a place to look for *somewhat* academic info on gender.

Thanks :o)




Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Post 36

Monday, May 2, 2005 - 1:58pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Tut tut Marcus...better duck for cover.
John,

No need to worry, I am the alpha-male after all :-)

People wondered why I chose not to indulge in heavy drinking at SOLOC 4.
Luke,

Yes. At SOLOC4 there was a chance you may have woken up lying next to a random guy :-)

I think many here are missing the point of Alec's article. He is not making light of rape, but discrediting the men hating phallophobic feminazi movement as embodied by famous Lesbian and ultra-Religious misogynists such as Andrea Dworkin.

Now why would any objectivist in their right mind, male or female, endorse the stereotype images invented by those types of women?





Sanction: 3, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 3, No Sanction: 0
Post 37

Monday, May 2, 2005 - 2:04pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Ginny, here's a puzzle for you. Try rearranging these words in a commonly-used phrase: "sense humour of a".



Sanction: 14, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 14, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 14, No Sanction: 0
Post 38

Monday, May 2, 2005 - 2:23pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Yes, there's nothing like a little rape or wife beating to give some people a much needed comic relief.  It was silly of me not to have realized this before this, but I do appreciate the enlightenment.

Ginny




Post 39

Monday, May 2, 2005 - 2:28pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Not to worry, Ginny - you be right... this is not a sense to have a humor about it....
(Edited by robert malcom on 5/02, 2:30pm)




Post to this threadBack one pagePage 0Page 1Page 2Page 3Page 4Page 5Page 6Forward one pageLast Page
[an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive]