The Evolution of A Feminist; or, Don’t Like Feminists? Stop Helping Create Them.
Published by Lisa Kansas November 21st, 2008 in Dudes, Feminism, Men's Rights Activism, Rights? What rights?, Soapbox, for reals
(Cross-posted from Glenn’s site. Note: Feminist-friendly moderation is in effect.)
Pat Robertson said it best: “”Feminism encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism and become lesbians.” More succinctly put, feminism is a favorite whipping girl. Feminism has become that magical word–”mainstream”–but that hasn’t made it popular or generally regarded in a positive light. And of all the folks out there that really hate feminists, men’s rights activists are probably among the most virulent and vocal about it.
The big difference between hating black people or Jews and hating feminist women–the difference espoused by people who hate the latter and not the former, say–is that black people or Jews are born that way. It isn’t a choice; being a feminist is a choice, a philosophy, not an ethnicity. Very true–but this argument leads to another, conspicuously not followed through upon by those who advocate it. As they say, feminist women are, indeed, not born feminist. But this does beg the question, doesn’t it..? –why do they become feminist?
I can’t speak for all feminist women; no one can speak for all feminist women, all women, all feminists, or all members of any other subgroup of humanity. However, I can state with confidence that many of the factors that drove me from a state of non-feminism approaching active antipathy to feminism, to publicly identifying as a feminist, are shared by a lot of other women. I’d love to discuss all the factors–but in the interests of article space, I am going to focus on just one of them. I believe that if this one specific factor were removed, there would be far fewer new feminist women–all you’d have to do to achieve a world much freer of mainstream feminism would be to outlive all the defanged old ones. (Witness their trouncing during the Democratic primaries as an example of that dynamic.)
The factor: Sexual predation.
Men are uniquely placed, as a group, to help end this problem and rid us forever of lots of future feminists. And it is a real problem, and it is a problem that I think men do not quite understand in its impact upon women in the same fashion that, say, white people do not understand what it’s like to grow up black. Not the day-to-day experience with all its million-and-one little unpleasant episodes, tens and hundreds of greater unpleasantnesses, and the periodic whomper of a crappy one that sometimes alters the entire course of the recipient’s life for the very much worse.
For one, imagine what it would be like to not only be smaller, weaker and slower than almost every male you know, but also that all those males know that you are smaller, weaker and slower than they are. (Men who are on the smaller side are not always automatically assumed to be easily physically dominated by larger men–but all women are assumed to be easily physically dominated by all men, whether it’s true or not). Now, imagine that all your life, from your boyhood onward, there had been a steady stream of males, from boys your own age up through adult men, who had tried to have sexual intercourse of one description or another with you and were often undeterred by your lack of interest, response or enjoyment. Say that, as you grew up, when you were alone with one, while most of the time they didn’t try to forcibly rape you, once in a while one of them did–but you never knew in advance which one it would be. Say that, once you reached adolescence and young manhood, you found that if you drank too much alcohol, other men would not infrequently try to use your inebriated or unconscious body for sex–again, indifferent to your lack of interest, response or enjoyment, and you never knew when it would happen and when it wouldn’t. Say that, as well, you knew many other smaller, weaker, slower men for whom this life situation was commonplace, and while technically every last bit of it was against the law, you didn’t know anybody, yourself included, who had ever actually involved the law. You read the newspapers, though, and saw how the smaller, weaker, slower men who did involve the law got treated and what they were called by prominent spokespersons, lawyers and religious and conservative “values” leaders.
I know that men, especially the smaller, weaker and slower men out there, can empathize with this, as there is one place where this situation is somewhat similar for them, and that’s in prison. Many men are terrified and revolted by the idea of going to prison, and the primary reason for that terror and revulsion is their exposure to, and the knowledge of their own lack of ability both to defend themselves physically from and to get sympathetic aid from the authorities from, sexual predation. Think of prison, in terms of sexual predation, as simply a more violent and concentrated form of the life of a girl and woman in terms of sexual predation–because it is.
No, I’m not exaggerating. As I said, I wasn’t born a feminist, and indeed had an antipathy toward it in its institutionalized form all the way up into my later teens. I can’t say that I fully evolved out of that and into the fully-fledged self-identity of feminist til my early thirties; it was a process, a long one. However, it began around the time my mom kicked me out at age sixteen.
Skipping over the whys and hows of that, it introduced me to something that I was not aware of til that time–that living within the boundaries of one’s family, as a young girl, conveys a great deal of sexual safety in terms of the encroachments of total strangers, and also, that in most instances, it was not boys my age that were the problem–it was grown men, in their early twenties up through, in one memorable instance, early fifties. Especially if one is desperately poor, as I was–it’s hard to survive on a minimum-wage part-time job and attend high school while paying rent and living expenses. There were many men who got to know of my circumstances through various means, and not to put too fine a point upon it, saw a golden opportunity to make a cheap whores out of me, knowing as they did that I was perpetually starving and exhausted and unable to afford medical care and other routine necessities of life. And, of course, there were those, fewer in number, that saw no need to even offer me the use of their washing machines or a ride in their car to the laundromat in exchange for sexual favors–they thought that, since I was smaller, weaker and slower and had no family and not even a phone to call for help, they could simply show up at the door and take what they wanted.
In the town I grew up in, every kid who was “on his own” or “on her own” knew all the other kids who were, so I knew several boys that were in similar situations to my own. The starvation and exhaustion were the same–but the sexual predation was not. It was, in short, a powerful and additional risk that I bore on a continuous basis solely due to my gender. That was the first realization that awakened me to the idea that, perhaps, there was a need for that devil, institutionalized feminism, after all.
The second realization was that de jure equality does not result in de facto equality. All those things were against the law, quite unambiguously–the sexual solicitation, the attempted rapes–but that did not stop the men who attempted to commit those crimes against me. I have no way of knowing how many men were stopped by it, but I do know how many were not, and were at least in appearances completely unconcerned with what the law might or might not think. Was it because they thought I’d never involve the law? Was it because they thought that if I did, nothing would come of it? Again, I have no way of knowing. But certainly they thought something that allowed them to completely disregard it. So my second awakening was that legislation against crimes that overwhelmingly victimize women–sexual solicitation, rape–is not a sufficient deterrent.
Again…my lack of parental support at age sixteen, while not the most common one, is hardly one that’s impossible to find. But anecdotal evidence is, of course, only that–one person’s story. But there are numbers out there to support it. For instance:
The National Runaway Switchboard Statistics on Runaways from Peer-reviewed Journals and Federal Studies reports that 80% of of runaway and homeless girls report being sexually or physically abused. According to R. Barri Flowers book, Runaway Kids and Teenage Prostitution, there are about 650,000 teenaged girl prostitutes in America, and more than two-thirds of all girls who leave home before age 18 will end up as prostitutes. The International Child and Youth Care Network says that “”survival sex” is even more common, according to the task force, volunteers and police:
“It starts with a person offering to share their motel room for a few hours so a kid can clean up and get some sleep,” Gregg,an investigative assistant for the Oceanside Police Department. said from her desk at the Police Department. “Then it becomes, ‘Hey, wasn’t that nice of me? Now give me a kiss.’ The next time it goes further and further and eventually becomes prostitution.”
Imagine you had a daughter, whose mother kicked her out and you didn’t know where to find her. Imagine that she was pretty, and bright, and quite sexually innocent–I was some man’s daughter, obviously; it’s not an imaginary scenario. Do you think that what happened to me could never happen to your daughter, or your sister, or your niece, through no fault of her own (as it wasn’t mine)? Do you genuinely not believe that there are many men out there that there are who are ready to prey on your daughter, your sister, or your niece, should she become homeless and unprotected by nothing save “the law?” Other women can’t save her–if those men aren’t afraid of the law, will they fear just another woman, smaller, weaker and slower than they are?
And what about the majority of girls, who do live at home? Their experiences, are less extreme, but the predator-prey dynamic is still there, and has a long-term psychological effect. Just recently, from Toronto:
A growing number of teenage girls view sexual harassment and even assault as “normal,” says a top Toronto school board official.
Gerry Connelly described the “new normal” phenomenon during her keynote address at the annual Safe Schools Conference in Toronto today.
“A young girl will see somebody being pushed against a locker and fondled inappropriately, or they are being touched inappropriately and they say: ‘Well that’s just the way it is,’” said Ms. Connelly, director of education at the Toronto District School Board.33% of students surveyed reported being sexually harassed in the school over the past two years. Twenty-nine per cent reported being the victim of unwanted sexual contact, including touching or grabbing at their school, and 29 female students or 7% of respondents reported being the victim of a major sexual assault at their school.
Another report on sexual harassment at 23 Ontario schools by the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health showed that 30% of Grade 9 girls and 28% of Grade 11 girls reported having been touched, grabbed or pinched in a sexual way.Ms. Connelly said she was disturbed to learn that 80% of TDSB students said they would not talk to teachers or police about crimes they witnessed or experienced.
According to the US Department of Justice, 17.6 % of women in the United States have survived a completed or attempted rape. Of these, 21.6% were younger than age 12 when they were first raped, and 32.4% were between the ages of 12 and 17. The FBI estimates that only 37% of all rapes are reported to the police. U.S. Justice Department statistics are even lower, with only 26% of all rapes or attempted rapes being reported to law enforcement officials.
My evolution into the feminist you see before you today was only begun by those experiences and realizations–many more, where my gender became a weapon to be wielded against me, were required to truly implant it into my psyche, to make it an intrinsic part of who and what I am. However, due to a need to keep things concise, other than a bare list of what those things were–the military, marriage, engineering school and engineering career–I can’t detail them all here. I wish I could–the story’s not complete. But, perhaps, it’s enough to begin to build an understanding based on empathy. I think, and I hope, that men’s rights activists can understand what it is to have one’s gender, a cornerstone of one’s identity, become the reason one is used and abused by others. It is a terrible thing.
I said near the beginning of this article, that men were uniquely placed as a group to help overcome this particular problem–the sexual predation of girls and women–that results in so many feminists. And they truly are–not because most men are sexual predators–I don’t believe that; I know that’s not true. When I was living on my own, there were many more men who did not try to abuse me than did. But I do know that men often look away from the reality that most sexual predators are men. And not only that–that it is epidemic that any girl who is unprotected by family is considered fair game in not only our culture, but even much more blatantly in many more. People, regardless of gender, do not respect the law if it is not enforced, and even more pertinently on a day-to-day basis, people do not cease behavior that is winked at or simply ignored.
Stop ignoring sexual predation–speak out against it. Don’t stop your efforts to combat false rape accusations–they are evil things. But recognize that one big reason they’re easy to believe for so many is that sexual predation is distressingly common enough that it takes no stretch of the imagination to believe that a rape or attempted rape has occurred. It isn’t just about showing no mercy to false accusers while showing great mercy to real rape and attempted rape victims–that isn’t even the most important thing you can do. The most important thing you can do is something no woman can–speak out among men. Don’t support pornography that shows girls and women used and humiliated like animals or toys, or worse, mock-raped or even raped for real. Don’t pretend not to know who among you likes his girls younger, or laugh or say nothing when the sneering references to girls and women as nothing but targets for use overtakes the conversation. I have spent a fair amount of time in the company of men in traditionally male settings; I know that all these things occur on a regular basis. A woman can’t say or do anything about any of that and be taken seriously, not taken to heart. But a plurality of men can.
This isn’t about tit-for-tat; it’s not about proving which gender has it “better” or “worse”–all this is about is getting rid of feminism. All that I have related here, in terms of the sexual predation experiences of girls and women, is true, and it is also true that they are a driving force in terms of keeping the machine of institutionalized feminism alive, well and healthily thriving. It isn’t “Women’s Studies” classes, nor is it even feminist rhetoric. Most women, like most men, don’t even have a college degree, and most girls, especially those in small and medium-sized towns, don’t ever meet a single, self-identified feminist to talk to while growing up. Until about fifteen years ago, the internet wasn’t a common resource and most of those girls and women prior to that never really laid eyes on a single line of feminist writing.
Feminism will die a natural death if the real, sad reasons young girls and very young women become feminist are taken away–if all that’s left are the cadre of any gender that wants to work the system, feminism will go the way of all scams. But it’s not one now for far too many women, and it won’t end without a majority of men as well as women committing to end the real and sad causes.
Or don’t, and have feminism around, and mainstream as long as women equal or exceed men in numbers, forever. It’s up to you.
This is a great essay, Lisa! And you know the funny thing — I’ve known for a long time that, say, single men who go out of their way to do a favor for a single woman will expect a date as quid pro quo, or at least feel entitled to be annoyed if they don’t get one. Some will also take it to the next level and expect sexual favors.
Somehow I never quite equated that to “sexual predation”, but it makes perfect sense to think of it as a point on the continuum between respect and rape. I do kind of suspect, though, that not only is it a small percentage of men, as you say, who take it too far, but that it’s probably an identifiable group (if you’re bored someday, google Baltimore and STDs and see if you find the story of city health officials who identified one group of regulars at one specific singles bar who were THE vector for almost all STD cases in the city) — if so, maybe there’s a way to handle the problem through policing.
And one little quibble: the set of men who see it as ok to paw any woman they find attractive might have a different view, but most men of my generation definitely fear ‘the law’ in the sense that they walk around with a constant low-level fear of being legally charged with harassment or date rape. I know plenty of guys who organize their interaction with strange women on the principle of safety first (and they’re probably the exact guys who don’t need to worry, because they treat women with respect in the first place)
Regardless of whether this makes it through to the MRAs over at Glenn’s site, I think it’s a powerful piece.
Stacy, re your quibble–you’re right, but unfortunately what the men who do want to touch without permission, etc. do, instead of suppressing those urges entirely in fear of the law, is target girls and women whom they feel “safe” harrassing or attempting to rape–girls and women who are poor, who distrust the law, who are drunk at parties and therefore can be disbelieved and ignored by authorities, etc. The law has just driven those type of men underground; it hasn’t stopped their behavior, merely focused it on the most vulnerable.
This is a really good essay. You’re hitting similar chords as Dworkin’s Twenty-Four-Hour Truce—in a very real sense, men are the only ones who can stop rape, they are the only ones who can stop the violent machine that kills women, and in the end, they are the ones who must tear down the patriarchy.
There’s a way in which that’s true. And because there’s a way in which that’s true, many feminists spend a lot of time understanding men and masculinity. There are a number of feminists who are trying to reach out to men—not unlike what you’re doing, actually. Male feminists in particular tend to focus on the ways in which men are harmed by the patriarchy, the ways in which men can unconsciously apply male privilege, and how men can fight back against this power structure.
I basically think that’s good work, I certainly hope feminists keep challenging and engaging with men, and I do try to draw men towards a feminist consciousness whenever I can.
(That’s not immensely often, because I practice a kind of de facto soft separatism, and most of the men I know and regard as friends are already conscious of their own privilege. That’s a personal survival tactic for me, not a panecea. Amongst everything else, the ability to practice separatism to any degree is an artifact of privilege, and many women just don’t have that choice.)
That being said, I can’t really get behind this:
I see why you wrote that, given the audience, and it definitely has some truth. But it’s also the case that women can and do build institutions to help other women. They are not a complete solution. They are not universally available, and they alone will not dissolve the patriarchy. But they do help women, and they do help us define and understand what kinds of institutions are able to support women, what kinds of institutions are able to support social justice, and ultimately, what sorts of institutions can replace the patriarchal ones that now hold so much power.
We need more of this. Absolutely, without a doubt, we need more of women helping women.
Because men won’t. That’s a lie, but it’s a small one—some men will, and it is still important to draw more men to feminist causes, but men as a group are not going to build these things any more than they are going to decide, tomorrow, to hold a twenty-four hour truce during which there is no rape.
Vi–I agree that women have built institutions to help other women, and that statement was primarily aimed at my intended audience, and I was indeed also only making the point that, if men do not cooperate, the best solution will never occur. I’m inclined to agree with “because men won’t” also, but I still feel like I have to try, kwim?
I am a Man. I agree with much of what you say. I don’t find your words threatening or “wrong”. I feel a Likely Path towards major change amongst Men - that is more than another brief pseudo-change is unlikely to Build out of Male Empathy and Support of Women and Girls.
(I wish that it would. I wish that We as Men and Boys could and Would change as we Should. I’ve seen Feminism and a Small Male Pro-Feminist Movement over the past 25 years. I worked for change and wrote a lot in the mid-1980’s. I see a Movement now that marginally has a few more Men involved. There is more awareness of Rape and Domestic Violence, but where some things may be better, others are Much Worse.)
Yes - there is Plenty - Far Too Much Sexist Violence - from Men and Boys - directed at Women and Children.
There Also - is much Violence - directed from Men and Boys at other Men and Boys. I’m Not saying that Male Violence directed at Males is More Important than Male Sexist Violence - Females Face.
I think though that the Common Factor is really Not - Females as a Subjugated Class - but Rather - Male Violence - as Such.
I heard Andrea Dworkin speak most eloquently in St. Paul in October, 1983 - to her first predominantly Male audience. I’ve heard Nikki Craft and other Women speak clearly and convincingly to both Men and Women. I’ve heard - John Stoltenberg, Steven Botkin, Paul Kivel, Rusk Funk and other Men - speak to Men in Strong, Helpful ways.
In recent years it has seemed increasingly apparent to me that We Men and Boys - are really unlikely - as a “class” to change significantly until - we begin seeing the Damage that we are doing to Ourselves - as Men and Boys. We kill and maim each other - and need to be on guard - “Better Than - Women and Girls” Yes - but also than Other Men and Boys.
Statistics about Male Mortality vs. Female Mortality - show clearly how we Men are “the weaker gender” - from birth onward. See the latter part of my April 28, 2008 Blog Entry - entitled - Rape, Lynching and Our Masculinity http://geoisphere.blogspot.com/2008/04/rape-lynching-and-our-masculinity.html - for data showing the frequency of Male deaths in the U.S. by age - vs similar Female deaths. The fears we Men have of Other Men - help keep us in our Place.
I think that Until and Unless - we Men - in large numbers start to see how “Maleness” - Numbs and Hurts and Kills Us - as Boys and Men - and begin to start seeing a necessity to Change for the Better - it will be Hard - and Probably Impossible - for us to begin to Honestly - see Women and Girls - as Not only our “equals” - but as Real Important People - We Can and Should Learn from. I believe that support of Feminism and Real Change - and the beginning of an end to Rape, Domestic Violence, Child Abuse, Sexual Harassment - Will come out of Our Growth - as Male People in positive, life affirming ways - trying to “save ourselves and our gender”.
In Such a Reality - that I can Only Dream of - You - as a Woman - won’t have to “become a Feminist” - because Feminism will be a key part of - Reality - that we All will - hopefully be key parts of. I am, in no way, saying that You - shouldn’t be doing the work that you are doing. I am in no way saying any more than that We, as Men and Boys - must change - must lead - must be, etc.
Thanks!
Lisa: Yeah, totally. I didn’t mean to say we oughtn’t try to engage men in feminist consciousness, just that at the same time, we shouldn’t ignore the value of institutions built by women (and, in fairness, feminist men) that directly address injustice. They’re very different approaches, but they’re both necessary—thunderstorm and spit being as they are.
I never thought about how the non-stop sexual harassment, especially when you’re younger, contributes. I tend to think I was angry at men that weren’t as smart as me talking down. But yeah, the sexual harassment gets to you. What is hilarious to me is that MRAs get so offended when you talk about this—it’s misandrist!—but with their dripping contempt for women, it’s clear that they’re the guys who holler from their cars at high school girls.
Which probably explains why they think sexual harassment is an inborn trait of men, and if you don’t acquiesce with a smile, you “hate” men.
I didn’t think smiles were considered necessary.
I don’t know how much cross-commenting you want from Glenn’s place: what I mean is, I want to make an observation about the thread over there without actually having to wade into it, so I’m gonna do it here.
The responses seem to fall into two categories, sometimes from the same commenter:
Those denying that sexual predation happens anywhere near as often as women say it does, and those who are furious, as non-predators with “non-predatory friends” themselves, at your contention that “men in general often turn a blind eye to it.”
I mean, seriously.
Yeah, it was mostly unsuccessful (SURPRISE) , me writing and posting that over there–but still interesting. My take on the most common comments are as follows:
1. Women rape too!
2. Expecting men to censure sexual predation is “chivalry.”
3. Feminists are hysterical about rape.
4. Crappy stuff happens to men too, which is way more interesting and important.
5. Women ask for rape by dressing slutty and getting drunk.
Oh, the, er, originality of it all.
not. But you know, I did get five or six really thoughtful comments–they didn’t necessarily agree with me, but they clearly read it, tried to feel it, and had some pertinent issues to raise about it. That is cool, and pretty much makes the whole shebang worthwhile.
Except, when guys mean number 1, they generally say things along the line of “don’t wear slutty clothing, and stop drinking, and stop going to places that “rape is more likely to happening” generally meaning places like frat house”. But since “slutty” isn’t something that we get to decide, and the rest is a major restriction on female activity, I’m not buying.
When I was raped, I was wearing flannel pjs, and it was an ex-boyfriend, and I was stone sober. So forgive me if I think that advice is stone stupid. The only action that could have prevented my rape is the action of my rapist. So, yeah, I’m going to go on the line that guys should “protect” us, in so much as they should STOP DOING THE ACTIONS THAT ARE VICTIMIZING US IN THE FIRST PLACE; either by their direct actions, or tacit acceptance.
Lisa, your essay really resonated with me. Even growing up fairly well off, and insulated by the support of my family, I experienced enough sexual predation for it to make a bit psychological difference. I remember one group of men who followed me when I was walking from work to the bus stop and kept trying to make me get into their car. They told me I had promised to get into the car, so I had to. It was scary then, but I only recently realized that they may well have been hoping to kidnap me and sell me as a prostitute. God, that’s scary.
One thought about men: several of the smaller and more feminine men I know have been steady targets of threats by larger men, and a many of these threats had sexual overtones. It seems like men who experience this can go two ways: some of them become wonderful allies who really get it on a gut level, and some of them turn right around to blame women, who are comparatively safe targets.
I love how you utterly failed to read the rest of my post.
Nobody said it would be easy. The fuck of it is, you aren’t even trying. And to avoid assumptions, no matter how well-founded: if you, personally, are trying, then that’s great. Do more. If you aren’t doing anything, do something. Go tell more men. Go build more anti-violence organizations. Go build more anti-rape organizations. Just fucking do it, and stop whining at feminists about how hard it is. We know.
Lisa was addressing the question: “Should men want feminism to be a backwards, outdated concern, what can they do?” She also incidentally addressed the question, “Should men want to support social justice, what can they do?” Saying, as you are, that men aren’t actually interested in destroying feminism anymore than men are actually interested in supporting social justice is not a rebuttal. Nor for that matter is it particularly surprising.
Lisa,
I like the title here better than there. But it opens the issue up a little more for me than just on sexual predation themes. If men don’t like feminists, they shouldn’t help create them the way they did with me…oh, I’m not ready to call myself a feminist and maybe never will but they sure did a lot to push me in that direction. What kind of sense does that make? So much for all that logic allegedly flowing between “all” men’s ears.
I agree with what Stacy wrote. I never looked at it as sexual predation at the time but many boys and men I dated seemed to think copping a feel was warranted if they bought me a hamburger on a date. Only one guy I dated took it well when I said no. He immediately took me home, said good night pleasantly and we continued to be friendly at school. He just never asked me out again but I could respect his honesty. He was obviously looking for something sexual and still respected me when I told him no. I now marvel looking back at how rare that reaction was from guys in general.
I think most men know all of this is true…that if they spend a dollar on a girl the least she should do in return is neck a little with them. I think MRA’s understand this is so perfectly well but they will never admit it.
You’re damn skippy I do. Particularly since your definition of “racist” seems to be “black people telling white people to stop being jackasses”.
Their TARGET?!? By telling guys to stop raping, assaulting, and victimizing them, and asking other guys to not accepted it when other guys do it, we’re TARGETING men? You have a very fucked-up definition of targeting.
Aside from that, let’s play the game “one of these things is not like the other”. Jews didn’t actually control the economy, and they sure as hell weren’t the ones in power. Women and minorities have never been in power, and they have been victimized. So, you’re logic is more fucked up then then North Dakotan weather.
And you know what? Fuck it: go spew your bile on Glenn’s blog. You’ve Goodwin-ed yourself on this one.
Nicholas, you have a point about there being cases of false allegations of rape. I will continue to speak out against women who do that, not only because it creates a false criminal who is then the victim but because it causes all claims of rape to be questioned.
Quoted for WTF.
Nickie, I’m pretty sure, the more I think about it, the more fucked-up your post is going to be. You’re “stop being so irrational” isn’t actually making any more substansive points: I don’t think it’s beyond the pale to be upset that someone called me a Nazi.
You say this like some men aren’t rapists, don’t steretype, don’t feel the need to protect their pride et cetera. You say this like other men don’t take a blind eye to this, and make jokes about it, and pretend like it doesn’t exist.
I know, for a fact, that it does. I don’t think all men do rape et cetera, but I do think most guys don’t care enough to stop the things that lead to it.
If you don’t like it, prove me wrong.
Reminderrrr….this particular thread, as has been the rule for quite a while now on Punkass threads for articles I post at Glenn’s…is feminist-friendly. I have deleted the comments that do not qualify, which I admit makes the comments posted in response to the deleted comments very confusing and disorienting.
But seriously, there’s a whole nother blog site for the anti-feminist to post comments about this article on. Go there, folks.
Well, what if we don’t care if we create more feminists? What if we have given up on society, and say “to hell with all of you, I’m doing what’s right for me”?
What if men become as self-centered as they are accused of being??
It’ll be sad, but life’ll go on, Fac. Just, I always pull for the better solution.
Being a feminist, I’ve had occasion to drink purée of man. It’s actually quite thin (probably because the skin and bones are boiled for stock, and the rest is basically fat and water).
(I know, I know. Cheap shot. At least he used a spell checker.)
Lisa
Aren’t you supposed to be on a honeymoon or something?
I don’t know how blithe I’d be about that Lisa.
I seriously don’t.
Factory:
Blithe about what idea? If men want to do what is right for themselves, to themselves, we are all for it.
Is that not what you meant? Or did you mean that men will do what is right for themselves, to others, because that we are against.
Was there some implicit threat of violence there instead of the threat of retreat from the society of women? Honestly it would be nice to get through a discussion with men’s rights supporters without such a rhetorical device coming into play but I have never seen it happen.
I find it interesting how many commenters focus on rape as the only manifestation of sexual predation, rather than as the more visible, and more easily identified, manifestation. In my (individual, personal, non-representative) experience, the low-level, not-explicitely-violent, background predation, combined with the non-stop reminders of the potential for rape, has had far more effect on my life.
I’ve never been raped. (Nobody’s ever forced me to have sex when I had clearly said “no.”)
I’ve been stalked. (He said he couldn’t live without me. He said that I wouldn’t know, but he’d be there.)
I’ve been harassed. (”Hey darlin’, why don’t you bring some of that over here?” “How would you like it if I just threw you up against that wall and had my way with you? … Oh, joking, joking!”)
I’ve been browbeaten into sex. (”Chances are, someone’s going to have his way with you,” he said, “I mean, you’re going off to university, and everything. I just want to make sure that your first experience is with me—someone who loves you and someone you trust,” he said. As if it would make a difference, when I didn’t want to have sex, whether it was with someone who claimed to love me or not.”
I’ve been threatened. (”I turned off the light when I punched the wall, because I didn’t want you to see me be violent.”—my hearing the violence, and imagining the violence was, apparently, okay.)
I’ve been commoditized. (”I paid for dinner, what’s your problem?”)
But I’ve never been raped.
It just doesn’t seem to occur to these commenters that the ongoing non-rape, in addition to the very real possibility that someone might just act on one of these threats, might just create a climate of fear for women, even if a woman has never been raped.
I’m also saddened by the lack of empathy among those men who really do seem to believe that women are responsible for their own rape and harrassment—that we should, somehow, anticipate what will turn a guy on and curtail and restrict our own actions, in ways that men never have to consider (don’t wear that dress, don’t get drunk, don’t go out alone, don’t take the shortest route home from the bus stop,….). Do they even know any women?
Ellenbrenna: What I was referring to is if men actually DID stop caring much for what happens to women. I mean, say men don’t care all you want…but a society where men are focused on their issues to the detriment (or neglect at best) of women’s issues? Or if we ignored them only to the same extent women ignore men’s?
Sorry, I really don’t think society would survive it. And like Lisa says in her post, there are a lot of bad men and women out there.
Lisa argues that men should care about women’s issues because “that’s what makes feminists”.
My point is tangential.
Men are starting to shrug more and more, given the lack of response, empathy, or support from any angle on making men’s lives easier. This is not an MRA stance (although I support it wholeheartedly), this is something men are just doing…in reaction to what women have been doing.
Which is something I have been saying for a while, so I may be reading more into this than I should.
Can you take the chance? Is not admitting you’re wrong about anything more important than the survival of our society?
Do you really think the society that would come out of that level of social breakdown would be anything other than brutal, and incredibly harsh on women, especially given the recent social outlook on men?
I’ve never understood the wilful blindness of the normal reactions of oppressed peoples, given the propensity of feminists to claim women are oppressed (which, again, I disagree with wholeheartedly).
Zingerella, your complaint would have a whole lot more weight with MRAs if it were (a) about reality rather than mollifying fears, and (b) Feminists didn’t say “Oh yeah, what about rape?” whenever they get the chance (all while refusing to actually address the point made - see Jeana in the refernced thread…and pretty much anywhere else…for example).
Pff. Patently false. Every generation, more and more men willingly accept greater equality between the sexes. It’s not without a massive amount of struggle and fight on the part of feminists, but more and more men every generation come around to the realization that full equality is not only great for women but for men, as well. More and more men self-identify as feminists or feminist supporters, too. Like it or not (and I know you don’t), fewer and fewer men are able to justify the inordinate amount of privilege they are accorded.
Just because you aren’t coming around doesn’t mean the rest of us aren’t. Your MRA propaganda looks like the death throes of ancient attitudes and prejudices to me.
Factory, Lisa’s post was actually only partially about rape. I was under the perhaps mistaken impression that the function of a comment thread was to engage with the actual points raised in the OP.
I’m sorry that the readers at Glenn’s blog have trouble actually, you know, reading what Lisa wrote and responding to that, instead of responding to their perception of what women say. I think it’s very sad that people seem unable to do this, because I think Lisa’s attempting to have an honest-to-goodness conversation, and the inability to actually address her points makes that very difficult.
I can’t even begin to wade through the 800 comments to find the ones that do manage to do so. I gave up after 50 and started spot-checking.
And are you really saying that my experiences are not drawn from reality? Seriously? Or are you saying that my interpretation of them is somehow unreasonable? Please explain to me not threatening violence, not claiming entitlement to sex because you’ve offered to do something kind (and yes, I’ve paid for people’s dinners before and never expected more than a sincere “thanks.”), joking about raping people who’ve turned you down, not to browbeating—in short, how not reminding a person that the only way she’s avoiding rape is because you’re such a nice, civilized guy—is mollifying her fears. I would say, rather, that doing any of the things I listed in my original comment constitutes preying on the ever-present societal narrative to which women are subjected from about the time they notice that there’s a difference between boys and girls. I’m not sure why it’s so difficult for some men to not do this or to, for even a moment, think about the effect that repeated instances of this might have on a woman.
“….the set of men who see it as ok to paw any woman they find attractive might have a different view, but most men of my generation definitely fear ‘the law’ in the sense that they walk around with a constant low-level fear of being legally charged with harassment or date rape.”
That used to be the cultural norm. it was what used to be considered good manners. I remember the 60’s very well form growing up in that era - the trend was away from good manners and all that artificiality. Whatever was raw and earthy was good, “inhibitions” were bad. There was also an element of ethnic slur to the disapproval of that kind of behavior; that kind of wolf whistle behavior how “Italians” and and “Negroes” and “that kind of people” acted. We are so much better than that, so far beyond all that now.
Maybe that bigoted bathwater stank so badly that throwing the baby of decent respect for people’s private space was not too small a price to pay. Maybe it was a false choice.
“Every generation, more and more men willingly accept greater equality between the sexes.”
Actually, Marc, your comment supports what Factory is contending. Men have typically defended women as a manifestation of chivalry. That chivalry is at odds with gender eqaulity. There may well be some other reason for men defending women, but it would be the same reason for women defending men. Do we have a culture in which a man can be called less than a real man for failing to defend or help a woman, or one in which a woman can be called less than an real woman for failing to defend or help a man, or a culture in which both of those are true?
Delurking for a few minutes to say:
“What I was referring to is if men actually DID stop caring much for what happens to women.”
With the exception of some men, when did men on the whole start caring?
“I mean, say men don’t care all you want…but a society where men are focused on their issues to the detriment (or neglect at best) of women’s issues?”
Um, hasn’t that been the way society has worked for centuries?
Jim2 wrote:
“Actually, Marc, your comment supports what Factory is contending. Men have typically defended women as a manifestation of chivalry.”
Marc’s comment does not support Factor’s point. Men “accepting greater equality” or “self-identifying as feminist” is not the same thing as chivalry. The feminist movement doesn’t need male allies to defend women. The most important work that male feminist allies and feminist-identified men can do is outreach toward other men.
Factory, I’m really getting sick of the ‘watch yourself cuz some guys won’t take your nonsense’ bullshit. Especially since the ‘nonsense’ almost always consists of wanting to be treated like a human being. And just that.
See, I even threw in a smiley face!
How is it so onerous, so fucking difficult to just treat people like people? To give a hand to someone w/ something just b/c you can and you feel like it? And not for some unspecified ‘payment’ in the future?
Y’know, some women are a lot stronger than you think. Some women are very, very tired of being harassed, catcalled, expected to be ‘grateful’/'nice’. Some women take martial arts, and learn very nasty, painful, permanent things to do to deserving ‘fed up w/ your nonsense’ men. And these women look like any other woman. So you might not realize the shit you’ve landed in till it’s too late…What? It’s just as hypothetical as your example.
Trying to stop injustice and violence is a sign of character regardless of sex. Chivalry, or any system that proposes that some people are worthy of protection while others are disqualified from such protection, is fundamentally unjust.
It is not feminists that advocate a cultural standard that praises violence against other men or demonizes and mocks male victims of sexual assault.
Feminist women do not ignore men’s issues when they are social justice issues as opposed to complaints about the loss of some form of privilege.
Feminists have historically supported men’s rights and lives from abolition to child labor and occupational safety laws to prison reform. If you think that is all in the past online feminists frequently object to the War on (certain kinds of people who do) Drugs among other things that hurt men.
We pay attention to your issues, we just don’t brook misogyny or homophobia while doing it. If that constitutes ignoring men’s issues than let’s hope you start to ignore women’s issues in precisely the same way.
With the exception of some men, when did men on the whole start caring?
“I mean, say men don’t care all you want…but a society where men are focused on their issues to the detriment (or neglect at best) of women’s issues?”
Um, hasn’t that been the way society has worked for centuries?
I think that’s exactly what factory was getting at in the first place.
I think that’s exactly what factory was getting at in the first place.
I think Factory’s argument is wishful thinking. It sounds a lot like the wishful thinking you read in certain post huge disaster sci fi novels, where women become property again and are constantly raped and abused except for those few who manage to hook up with chivalrous men who protect them. As if all our rights as human beings are special chivalrous advantages men grant us and we’d all be in the gutter otherwise.
However the truth is that women in the western world have had greater and greater equality for decades and we’re not about to give them up. No weird sci fi disaster is going to happen that will turn back the technological advances of our day.
Women have always been disadvantages as a group against men because 1. we’re on average physically weaker 2. we have children we’re bonded to and feel a strong need to take care of which limits our ability to care for ourselves and greatly increases our responsibilities 3. we are generally emotionally attached to at least one male and frequently multiple males (and don’t want to hurt them). Oh and 4. We are socialized since we’re babies to not be physically or otherwise aggressive or violent. Conditioning is a powerful force.
However today we have really good contraception so fewer and fewer of us have children that we don’t have the support to raise. If things really were getting lawless guns are a great equalizer between those of different strength, as is banding together with other women. More women are raised without the strong passive social conditioning.
As for the emotional attachment? I think that’s one of the reasons women are almost never as badly oppressed as other groups (few genocides, because men too get attached) but have a harder time organizing against that oppression. There’s too much sleeping with the ‘enemy’.
But you can bet that if men tried to deny basic right to go and earn a living etc. to women in the U.S. today women would get together in a hurry. It’s a lot harder to take rights away.
(Maybe Factory and men like him are confusing the normal emotional attachment men feel for the women in their lives as ‘chivalry’ and a great ‘favor’ they’re doing them, and are blind to the fact that women make a lot of choices in order to not hurt the men in their lives or make their lives easier, we can ’shrug’ and stop doing that as well. That would kind of kill the ability of men to have children, a pretty big problem for a lot of men.)
So basically, no Factory, society would not fall apart if men stopped caring about women’s rights (even the little bit they do now). But it would get a whole lot uglier and become a harder life for both sexes and I wouldn’t be so certain about which gender would be harder hit. But I don’t think that could happen because we’re all human being and we can’t stop caring about each other no matter how hard we try. And once you knowledge that someone can think and reason t’s hard to keep pretending that they can’t.
This comment is now insanely long and rambling, I will stop.
Oh and yes there are women, plenty of them, that will come to the aid of a man in trouble. That’s because we’re ethical human beings and don’t find it acceptable that anyone is physically assaulted.
We’ll even speak up when someone is denigrating a man for being a ‘pussy’ because he’s being sensible. We don’t do it because men are weaker then us, or even because it aids our goal of equality, we do it because it’s the right thing to do.
Could you give us an example?
I would be very interested in those other factors. I hope you do a post on it sometime in the future.
I’m not convinced that this would tangibly reduce the number of new feminists as I think there are more issues to solve and these issues would “pick up the slack in a manner of speaking.” As long as women as a group have problems I think their will always be new feminists. Regardless, reducing sexual predation (or eliminating it, if possible?) is a good thing, and I don’t doubt that it drives women to feminism.
Also, I haven’t heard anyone bring up the seduction community yet. I’m kind of curious as to what others think about SC in relation to this post.
I’m totally clueless about the “seduction community.” To be honest, I’m not even 100% sure what it is; I’ve never known anybody in person to have ever so much as mentioned it. First time I ever heard about it was on the internet, mentioned by an MRA who was leaving us a nastygram on an old post. So, I at least don’t think much about it one way or the other?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seduction_community
A brief history
I think my last post end up in the spam bucket.
Wonderful post, Lisa.
The first time I heard about it was on the net also. The basic gist of the Seduction Community/Pickup Artists is that there are guys out there that teach “seduction techniques.” These guys range in what and how they teach. Feminsts Critics has some blog posts on it here if you’re interested. I’m not overly familiar with it, other than what little I’ve read there. Just thought that in light of sexual predation context, that guys that teach other men particular techniques to get women, would be something worthwhile to discuss.
Oh good God. Re the “seduction community,” I’m wavering between laughing and sneering. Wait, did somebody else bring this up once in terms of some guy who made a total laughingstock out of himself by leaving some pathetic obsessive set of voicemails on some woman he met in a bar’s answering machine?
I dont think one of us bought it up.
Oh yeah:
http://punkassblog.com/2008/07/20/the-worst-person-on-the-planet/
That, I haven’t heard about. This, I have.
An example.
I think that’s true, rather along the lines of what Zing was saying earlier. But I think Lisa’s broader point (and, for that matter, Dworkin’s) is that actually eliminating sexual predation of all women would be such a radical shift in society that we can’t really know what kind of problems women as a group would face thereafter. It may in fact be that eliminating sexual predation requires, simply, eliminating oppression. Which would make it, obviously, a pretty ambitious goal. I think there’s still value in that, even if we might never see it accomplished, since the individual steps towards that goal are in themselves valuable social justice achievements, should we chose to make them so.
And should we, y’know, choose to work towards that goal at all.
Also:
Would it be too much to ask that we talk about how men can apply their privilege to act as, I dunno, allies? To work against patriarchal institutions that, y’know, hurt people? Could we talk about the shape of a men’s movement that can actually work towards social justice? And how that movement could be built? Could we talk about how to inspire men to feminist consciousness? Maybe?
As opposed to, say, figuring out how fucked up men could make the world if they all got together and really started raping and assaulting women like they meant it. Let’s just take it as a given that, yes, when that happens, it’s utterly catastrophic.
But it’s not some bullshit pseudo-threat based on “oh-well-don’t-you-think” armchair sociology. It’s not the plot of a cheesy scifi action flick. It’s the actual lived experience of millions of actual women.
So could we please, and I’m willing to beg here, work on that?
Violet,
Do seriously think that’s an example of a feminist standing up for men’s issues???
Excerpted From “Women, Race, & Class”
Paperback - 288 pages (February 12, 1983)
Vintage ; ISBN: 0394713516
by Angela Davis
“The resurgence of racism during the mid-1970s has been
accompanied by a resurrection of the myth of the Black rapist.
Unfortunately, this myth has sometimes been legitimized by white
women associated with the battle against rape. Consider,
for example, Susan Brownmiller’s concluding passage of the
chapter of her book entitled “A Question of Race”:
Today the incidence of actual rape combined with
the looming spectre of the rapist in the mind’s eye,
and in particular the mythified spectre of the black
man as rapist to which the black man in the name of
his manhood now contributes, must be understood as
a control mechanism against the freedom, mobility
and aspirations of all women, white and black. The
crossroads of racism and sexism had to be a violent
meeting place. There is no use pretending it doesn’t
exist.64
Brownmiller’s provocative distortion of such historical cases as
the Scottsboro Nine, Willie McGee and Emmett Till are designed to
dissipate any sympathy for Black men who are victims of
fraudulent rape charges. As for Emmett Till, she clearly invites
us to infer that if this fourteen-year-old boy had not been shot
in the head and dumped into the Tallahatchie River after he
whistled at one white woman, he would probably have succeeded in
raping another white woman.
Brownmiller attempts to persuade her readers that the absurd and
purposely sensational words of Eldridge Cleaver - who called rape
an “insurrectionary act” against “white society” - are
representative. It seems as if she wants to intentionally conjure
up in her readers’ imaginations armies of Black men, their
penises erect, charging full speed ahead toward the most
conveniently placed white women. In the ranks of this army are
the ghost of Emmett Till, the rapist Eldridge Cleaver and Imamu
Baraka, who once wrote, “Come up, black dada nihilismus. Rape the
white girls. Rape their fathers. Cut the mothers’ throats.” But
Brownmiller goes further. Not only does she include men like
Calvin Hernton whose book is unequivocally sexist - but also,
among others, George Jackson, who never attempted to justify
rape. Eldridge Cleaver’s ideas, she argues,
… reflect a strain of thinking among Black male
intellectuals and writers that became quite
fashionable in the late nineteen sixties and was
taken on with astonishing enthusiasm by white male
radicals and parts of the white intellectual
establishment as a perfectly acceptable excuse of
rape committed by black men.65
Susan Brownmiller’s discussion on rape and race evinces an
unthinking partisanship which borders on racism. In pretending to
defend the cause of all women, she sometimes boxes herself into
the position of defending the particular cause of white women,
regardless of its implications. Her examination of the Scottsboro
Nine case is a revealing example. As Brownmiller herself points
out, these nine young men, charged and convicted of rape, spent
long years of their lives in prison because two white women
perjured themselves on the witness stand. Yet she has nothing but
contempt for the Black men and their defense movement - and her
sympathy for the two white women is glaring.
The left fought hard for its symbols of racial
injustice, making bewildered heroes out of a handful
of pathetic, semi-literate fellows caught in the
jaws of Southern jurisprudence who only wanted to
beat the rap.66
On the other hand, the two white women, whose false testimony
sent the Scottsboro Nine to prison, were
. . corraled by a posse of white men who already
believed a rape had taken place. Confused and fearful,
they fell into line.67
No one can deny that the women were manipulated by Alabama
racists. However, it is wrong to portray the women as innocent
pawns, absolved of the responsibility of having collaborated with
the forces of racism. In choosing to take sides with white women,
regardless of the circumstances, Brownmiller herself capitulates
to racism. Her failure to alert white women about the urgency of
combining a fierce challenge to racism with the necessary battle
against sexism is an important plus for the forces of racism
today.”
Vi, I think part of what I was saying, above, is that sexual predation—not necessarily rape, but that too—is so much a part of how some men interact with women that it’s nigh impossible to avoid, unless one simply ignores it, and that it colours every other interaction between men and women, and women and society at large.
i don’t mean that I worry about my boyfriend raping me. I select very carefully for non-predatory men. I mean, though, that “non-predatory” has to be one of the criteria I apply to choosing male partners, in a way that I don’t tend to worry about with female partners.
As for the seduction community, I don’t think much about it. In fact, I had to look it up. Am I correct in my assessment that this is about guys who want to get laid, finding women who want to get laid, and hooking up, using applied communication techniques in order to both indirectly signal their interest, and indirectly ascertain the other party’s interest? I think that if men want to try to improve their pick-up technique, that’s their lookout as long as they take no for an answer, and go away. Hitting on a woman is not a necessarily predatory action—sometimes it’s a perfectly appropriate thing to do. The entire game sounds completely tedious to me.
“The feminist movement doesn’t need male allies to defend women.”
Oh really? The feminist movement doesn’t expect male police oficers to arrest men beating their wives? Doesn’t expect the male-dominated legal system to prosecute male rapists and imprison them in jails run by male guards? Doesn’t expect male UN peacekeping forces to go in and stop atrocities aimed at women? (The feminsts movent is strangely silent on atrocities aimed at men, but that’s another issue.)
Come to think of it, name on victory of feminism, starting with the vote, that didn’t depend, not jusy need but depend on male allies?
“So could we please, and I’m willing to beg here, work on that?”
in total agreement with you there, Violet.
Oh, definitely. And I should have said that I think you’re right that a lot of the discussion—including my comments, here—has sortof conflated rape with the larger issue of sexual oppression, which can be limiting.
I think the broadness you’re talking about is by design. Definitely, sexual oppression is built deeply into the structure of just about every society on earth. Which means that even if we’re just talking about ending rape in particular—or, hell, even if we’re just asking for a one-day truce—then the amount of work required is immense. Radically altering the scripts in relationships between men and women—and, for that matter, deconstructing heterosexuality—are probably, at best, solid first steps. I think the value of saying “stop rape,” (or “stop sexual oppression”) is as a spur, a lattice around which more tangible activism can be built. We’re not going to solve it tomorrow, but maybe tomorrow we’ll build something that steps slightly closer, and is valuable unto itself.
I try to stay pleasantly far away from that, uh, “community,” too, but the critiques I’ve seen are of how nakedly manipulative, and so inherently objectifying, the “techniques” are. This girl won’t fuck you? Get out fast, because obviously, that’s her entire value as a person.
Fair enough. I don’t think that the pick-up scene is any sort of template for a pleasant or sensible relationship. I suspect that it might equitably work in an environment in which most if not all present were on the prowl, as it were.
I can also, upon reflection, see how an environment frequented by members of the community might prove a somewhat hostile environment to anyone who wasn’t on the prowl—the impossibility of simply being permitted to sit and enjoy a drink without someone assuming you’re there as fodder for their pick-up artistry does limit the appeal of a space.
“Can you take the chance? Is not admitting you’re wrong about anything more important than the survival of our society?”
Personally, as a socialist and a radical, I’m really not that interested in the survival of a society as deeply fucked up as our current one. See you after the revolution
Violet,
You’re right that the what ifs etc. aren’t very useful and aren’t important when compared to working to build a men’s movement towards things like eradicate sexual predation. However, when you have men that think a police officer that’s doing his job is being chivalrous as long as a woman is being benefited these men will think that women already get soo many benefits by men, how can they be so ungrateful and ask for more? And this mind set is not going to allow them to join the kind of movement you’re talking about until it’s changed. Though those men are probably a lost cause and we shouldn’t waste our time on them.
Your post doesn’t say it exactly but it implies that the reason we don’t have some of the horrors you link to here is because our men are nicer guys. I don’t think that’s it exactly and I don’t think it’d be easy to get to that kind of state absent unrealistic what ifs. That’s not really on topic though.
I think sexual predation has been decreasing and will continue to decrease, because both men and women are changing, so there’s hope.
Yes.
With the caveat, of course, that through revolution we build something new; this implies very specific things about what the shape of the revolution must be.
This is actually a larger problem that I’m still not sure how to address. Obviously, you can’t awaken feminist consciousness in everyone, even if it’s all you spend your time doing; worse, you can easily spend all your time sparring with brick walls, rather than engaging with people. At the same time, I’m fundamentally not willing to write anyone off, both because they’re, y’know, people, and because they can hurt others. Like, maybe we have an idea of what to do if one of your friends is an abuser, but what about some random guy?
Right now, my approach is pragmatic. I’m going to spend energy on what I can, as best I can. But that doesn’t feel, y’know, whole.
Well, two of those links are how instances of an American woman being raped by a group of American men, so that’s pretty obviously not the case. I do think a series of social justice movements garnering more awareness of and power for oppressed peoples has made sexual violence ever-so-slightly less normalized in places where those movements have taken hold. But it’s delicate—look at the U.S. armed forces. Which brings up another major factor: western societies export violence. We send it elsewhere, where we don’t have to look at it, and where it won’t hurt white people. We send it to marginalized communities within our own borders. Those practices—rape as a weapon of war, rape as a colonial weapon—are the ongoing legacy of colonialism. Which is why even if you decide that all you want to do is end rape, dismantling colonialism is an utter necessity.
From the Wikipedia site on “seduction communities”:
‘The seduction community’s origins date back to Eric Weber’s 1970 book “How to Pick Up Girls.”
End Quote
Hmmm. How many times have I seen a guy on the other site whine about women’s books like “The Rules”??? And the above book pre-dates “The Rules” by at least a decade or two.
This is the stuff I hate. When one side or the other whines about something and it turns out they are guilty of saying or doing the exact same thing.
“Hmmm. How many times have I seen a guy on the other site whine about women’s books like “The Rules”??? ”
Yes, exactly. The two things are close parallels.
The two things are close parallels insomuch as they are both incredibly reductive, shitty books that dehumanize people.
Actually, no. Feminists have spent vast amounts of time and energy creating organizations and networks to support survivors of sexual assault. Since so few rapists are prosecuted and fewer still are convicted, I’d venture to state that most of us are not holding our breaths waiting for the legal system to provide “justice.”
Again, state intervention in cases of domestic violence does not solve the problem, and in fact, can often worsen the abuse.
Feminists are critical of U.N. peacekeepers, since they have been known to rape the people they were supposed to be protecting.
As for feminists “silence” on “men’s issues,” there have been many examples of feminist takes on”atrocities toward men” brought up on this very blog since MRAs came over. I’m not going to re-hash them here, but google Jackson Katz or Michael Kimmel if you want examples. The problem is that MRAs don’t like the solutions feminists propose to these issues, or they conflate reconstructing masculinity with attacking men as people.
That said, institutions occasionally benefit some oppressed groups, some of the time, but these benefits are side effects of anti-oppression movements agitating for change. Some small changes seep into larger social structures through cultural osmosis, not through the benevolence or chivalry of those in power.
You’re begging the question. You state that men control these powerful institutions and that women need these powerful institutions to liberate them from the oppression, but the structure of institutions inherently perpetuates oppression. If we accept the premise that men do, indeed, control these powerful institutions, and that these institutions oppress women, it is illogical to claim that feminists are “dependent” on men. The existence of allies does not imply that movements depend on them. Would you say that the Black Power movement depended on white police officers to stop racially motivated murders, or even to stop committing hate crimes themselves? Women fought for the right to vote for eighty years; it’s not as if men just up and decided that giving women the vote would be the gentlemanly thing to do.
I’m not claiming that allies shouldn’t use their privilege to work for social justice in ways that oppressed people can’t, or that ally work isn’t important, but allies should never obscure the work of people who actually comprise movements.
The two things are close parallels insomuch as they are both incredibly reductive, shitty books that dehumanize people.
And I, for one, blame the patriarchy for both of them ;-P.
“Actually, no. Feminists have spent vast amounts of time and energy creating organizations and networks to support survivors of sexual assault. ”
Wonderful. Think of how much more effective your groups would be if they had the funding currently being wasted, according to you, on the prison-industrial complex. I look forward to your agitation and legislative pressure to defund it.
“Feminists are critical of U.N. peacekeepers, since they have been known to rape the people they were supposed to be protecting.”
Well, good. Then we can expect feminists to form armed groups to go in and protect these vulnerable people?
Nowhere did I say that attempting to legislatively de-fund the prison-industrial complex would be an effective tactic to promote anti-violence organizations. That was your opinion. Using an oppressive institution (politics) to try and rectify the problems caused by another oppressive institution (the legal system) amounts to ineffectual activism. I am more interested in creating radical relationships, communities, and organizations to address oppression within our own communities.
I’m not quite sure what your point is. I merely stated that the feminist movement does not “depend” on U.N. peackeepers, or on men in general, since both men and U.N. peacekeepers are often the perpetrators of violence against oppressed groups. It is easy for those in power to shield harm they commit under the guise of protection.
Absolutely! Was that meant to be sarcasm? Because we’re doing just that.
Well, yes, actually,
But there’s a much more significant problem with your argument: you’re conflating institutions with allies, and none of the institutions you’re talking about—not the police, not the political system, and certainly not the military— are allies of feminist causes or institutions. You’re saying that we needed the blessing of state patriarchs for women to get the right to vote—except, of course, it wouldn’t be an issue if they hadn’t denied women the vote in the first place. You’re saying that we need the police stop violence against women—but our criminal justice system is itself the cause of most of that violence, often very directly. You’re saying that we need military interventions to halt atrocities, but those interventions will be made by the very same armies that created the violence to begin with, and it is not at all a given that they will make things better.
Demanding that these institutions act for social justice instead of the more usual reverse is simply what social justice movements do. That those demands are sporadically, glacially, and incompletely acted upon is hardly evidence that, say, the Birmingham police are anti-racist allies. It’s evidence that the black liberation movements have been, at least in part, successful.
Demanding that individual men—or even male-dominated movements—become allied with feminism is a different manner of thing. We’re demanding it because allies can do important and valuable work, and allies with privilege can use that privilege to work against oppression. We are not demanding it because we need big, strong men to protect us and beat up the bad people and invade, I dunno, Saudi Arabia. To then respond, “well, you wouldn’t have gotten anywhere if not for male allies,” effectively erases the work of all the women in the movement, and is no less problematic than telling a anti-racist activist, “well, you wouldn’t have gotten anywhere if not for white people,” or a queer activist, “well, you wouldn’t have gotten anywhere if not for straights.”
Which is why, if someone asks, “what will you do if no men decide to help?” my answer will be, “nothing very different.” But it’s rather a false question, since men continue to join in feminist activism. Better questions along this line might be: “how can we get more,” and “why haven’t you?”
What bewilders me here, Jim2, is that you seem to think that an individual doing his job to the letter of the law is an example of “male support of women/feminists” if the individual doing his job is (a) male and (b) does it without checking to see what sex the person he is doing his job for is.