What constitutes Misogyny?

[compared2what?]

I'm almost positive that's the facile argument people use to dismiss the 1-in-4 study not the 1-in-6 study, honey. Are you sure you're not getting them mixed up?

I'll go check, I guess.

You're quite right, in that I was wrong. I was thinking of 1 in 4. I've also heard 1 in 3, 1 in 5, 1 in 7, and so forth, I've never gone through studying them all.

Not that I accept the six figure, though.

I feel kind of bad about doing it, considering the sheer overwhelming volume of massive studies that have been finding male-on-female rape/attempted-rape prevalence rates that are perfectly and thoroughly consistent with it for years and years and years by now, but:

Really? Gosh. On what basis do you reject all the studies that support it?

Also, I'm not sure how it qualifies as facile to accept a woman's word as to whether she has been raped, rather than imposing your interpretation on the events of her life. Might as well add "women are a bunch of fucking idiots" to barracuda's "men are a bunch of fucking rapists" if you're going down that road.

I assume you're referring to the Koss study. Are you? Because if so, the answer is that it doesn't. It qualifies as facile to characterize that study as one that unreasonably or wrongly concluded that women had been raped according to its own madcap feminist beliefs on the subject.

Once again, I find it almost impossible to see how anyone who'd read it could understand it that way, really. In the event that you have not read it, but merely read of it, may I tell you something? Excellent. Here we go:

You're an incomparably more astute, agile and accomplished thinker/writer than Christina Hoff Summers or Warren Farrell (or whoever wrote the account of the Koss study that led you to believe it was something it wasn't) will ever be on his or her best day, imo. And, oh, man, do I ever root for the day to arrive on which you know that as thoroughly as I do.

Because those losers are holding you down, my friend. They're dead weight. Just pitch 'em over the side, I say.

[wallflower]

Thank you compared2what for making things clear.

compared2what wrote:

In practice, violent sexual assault continues to occur on a regular basis that goes largely unrecognized by everyone -- including (to some extent) the people to whom it occurs -- because it's normal.

I think there is another reason, hardly mutually exclusive, that violent sexual assault goes unrecognized. It follows Edmond Burke:

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good people do nothing.

I know that I actively avoid news accounts of violent sexual assault. I'm not proud of that, and nor do I want to be complacent or cynical.

When I read C2W's account of being assaulted on the bus as a teen I turned around in my chair and stood up. I get ants in my pants when I don't know what, anyhow the image in my head was of a particular 13 year old in my life.

Most of my relatives live a distance away. I do understand why people find Facebook creepy, but I got hooked on it when I found family members using it. I enjoy seeing the photographs and little stories of daily life. I particularly enjoy seeing how the teens represent their lives online. I like hearing stories about them from their parents, but I really love to hear their stories in their own words and to see them point to what's important to them.

It doesn't take explaining to me to understand that sexual assault dashes hopes and dreams, and to understand that assault constrains and diminishes the creative imagination of what seems possible. I take such joy in the accomplishments and creativity of my young relatives that the prospects of violence diminishing them makes me sad.

Usually when I say something I imagine as encouraging feminism to older teens than the 14 year old the reaction is to roll their eyes. In an odd way I think young people basically look at older people, even ones they're fond of, as trying to constrain and limit them. And it seems that some young women see feminism as part of the conspiracy of old. Maybe young people ask: "How can I fight for women as a class when I'm so busy fighting so hard to find my way?" I get much better reactions when pointing to a particular area of concern to women and girls, or asking about what they perceive as an injustice or and example of unfairness. And when I think of that 13 year old who came to mind reading C2W I'm happy that hears her father advocate feminism even if he doesn't use the word outright; and even if she cringes when he says such stuff.

Way back in this thread a Bystander Model of anti-violence prevention was pointed to...I'm drawing a blank on the guy's name. Also a while back a video of a bully getting his comeuppance got passed around on the internet http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6nZkbLK2Wg The remarkable thing about the comments I saw about the video is nobody commented about the girl who tell's one of the bully's friends: "I think you need to back off." Not only do we fail to recognize assault, we don't seem to recognize intervention and prevention as something we need to do and encourage.

Following this thread the absence of male voices allied with women's voices straining to be heard has been noticed. Or to be direct: my voice in protest certainly hasn't been heard. Online, "calling out" is often important and appropriate, but it isn't always obvious when it is so. Partly my confusion about when calling out is appropriate probably has to do with my obliviousness. Still, it seems there is something hard about knowing when. I don't think that the answer is "always."

At some blogs in order to reduce the amount of repetitious contentiousness there a custom of pointing to a particular post like "Check my what?" On privilege and what we can do about it http://blog.shrub.com/archives/tekanji/2006-03-08_146 That seems a pretty good custom, but I'm not sure how much it actually cuts down on the contentiousness on blogs. Sometimes nothing works quite so well as repetition.

Often metaphors are used like "Men need to wake up about sexual violence." That's good as far as it goes, but it probably also promotes the idea of a quick radical transformation and that's probably not what most often happens. Moving from allies in spirit to allies in deed begins with baby steps. "If we can take one step we can take another" is of course a metaphor as well. It has the advantage over the waking metaphor of suggesting that learning to walk the right way may take some time. Also it's good because walking requires some performance not just attitude adjustment. That said, I'm as guilty as the next fella for not recognizing what's obvious, so sometimes probably need to be shaken with "Wake Up!"

Here's Tony Porter's organization A Call to Men's 10 Things Men Can Do To Prevent Domestic and Sexual Violence http://www.acalltomen.com/page.php?id=51 I can't claim there is nothing I can do about it; there's a list of at least ten things.

[Project Willow]

(All redundancy, internal or external, is intentional)

It's a vile thing to say, but I'm now all right with the poetic license.

It's a vile reality to acknowledge. A "bunch" is not that far of a stretch when those who don't, look away from those who do, and probably gain in small ways from their apathy.

showing it for what it is: a vile incentive to hatred.

No, it's an incitement to outrage, one that I share, when I'm at the far reaches of my anger.

I don't see vile rhetoric, I see vile reality exposed.

[compared2what?]

barracuda wrote:
Honestly, I don't really care if people's feelings get hurt here about this. I know for a fact that if one in six women are sexually assaulted, the only real conclusion that can be drawn from that statistic is that men are, generally speaking, largely a bunch of fucking rapists. And until this attitude changes - men's attitude toward women - the nature of the state will never change, the wars will never end, the pollution will keep pumping, the assaults will keep happening, the prisons will get fuller, and on and on.

There is another real conclusion which can be drawn from that statistic. It is crucial to the integrity of this thread that someone among you correct Barracuda. That you have not done so to this point casts doubt on your willingness and perhaps your ability to express fairly your version of the collective experience. The aforementioned alternative conclusion is based on simple statistical evidence (available on every--first 3--rape statistic website I referenced) which ironically is often cited to show that men are, generally speaking, largely a bunch of fucking rapists. It is a simple truth and refutes Barracuda's facile and erroneous conclusion completely, showing it for what it is: a vile incentive to hatred.

If I must... and for seekers of truths which more closely approximate whole truths... LisaK may guide you.
Godspeed.

You could have said that non-cryptically in two short, declarative sentences, you know.

FWIW, though, speaking as one who is aware of several other real conclusions that can be drawn from that statistic, including the one to which you refer:

That wouldn't be a correction. It would be the blunt-force application of one overdetermined reading to another.

[compared2what?]

So this is what freshmen women entering the most prestigious university in America, and possibly the finest in the world,

I thought we were talking about Yale.

So. A Harvard man, are you?

[JackRiddler]

charlie meadows, how about you cut the cryptic and just say what you mean, so that I can also understand it, being too stupid to get it as it now stands.

[Canadian_watcher]

Ironically this is one of the only times I've felt that I know WTH charlie meadows is talking about.

s/he would like for someone here to restore the credibility of the whole thread (as if one or more of us represent that, or even claim to) and to do this, we must disavow what 'one of our own' wrote. Disavow this: "Men are, largely, a bunch of rapists"

I don't like the inflammatory nature of that statement, I admit that I have thought so myself from time to time, but I also know a large number of awesome men who wouldn't fit the category. I'll say that, but I'm under no obligation to protect the thread or the movement, for that matter, from anything anyone else says. I might be inclined to reciprocate however if 'the other side' (god why should we have sides on this fundamental issue?) would have, even once, spoken up against any of the hundreds of outrageous claims and insults one of their member have hurled in this place.

That never happened, so fuck it. I'm not inclined to soothe anyone today.

But here. LisaK: http://yesmeansyesblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/04/predators-again-npr-cites-lisak/

It's a blog called Yes Means Yes and has at least one entry about how it's really a small group of men who actually do the raping on college campuses.

While that last point is very likely true, I argue that there's considerable guilt by association on campuses. The culture proves to women who have been raped that a large majority of the rest of the men (particularly those with power) are willing and eager voyeurs. Rapist vs rape fan, if you like. Same thing if you ask me.

When I was attacked in that bathroom, for instance, no man of official power did a thing to help and in fact they impeded justice. Of my friends there were those who told me to just forget it and whined that I'd ruined the whole night. No kidding. That really hurt more than words can say... certainly more than the assault itself.

edit: I might have gotten my analysis of charlie's post wrong, who knows. Or maybe you were referring to the lyric. In any case it's closer to intelligible (to me personally) than some of the others in the past.

[JackRiddler]

.

That's approximately what I'm figuring was meant. It's important to know whether the 1 in 4 or 1 in 6 women become victims of rape, but the perpetrators tend to be serial and therefore constitute a far smaller proportion of men than 1 in 6. That sounds about right. But many to most men participate in the cultural denial, or in the active misogynist herd rituals (as in the Yale example) that help enable and trivialize the acts of physical violence. That includes pretty much all of us at specific points when we are confronted with situations we can dismiss as hearsay, and where we might not even realize how much we dither and deny, act as conformists or cowards, take the easy way out. As to the separate question of how many men are unknown monsters, deterred only by the fear of punishment, this is unknowable and at any rate complex (monsters are always partly made by circumstance, not an inherent fate).

.

[Canadian_watcher]

It's important to know whether the 1 in 4 or 1 in 6 women become victims of rape, but the perpetrators tend to be serial and therefore constitute a far smaller proportion of men than 1 in 6. That sounds about right. But many to most men participate in the cultural denial, or in the active misogynist herd rituals (as in the Yale example) that help enable and trivialize the acts of physical violence. That includes pretty much all of us at specific points when we are confronted with situations we can dismiss as hearsay, and where we might not even realize how much we dither and deny, act as conformists or cowards, take the easy way out. As to the separate question of how many men are unknown monsters, deterred only by the fear of punishment, this is unknowable and at any rate complex (monsters are always partly made by circumstance, not an inherent fate).

yes. That was roughly a 3 hour class distilled into a paragraph. Of course, in the class there would be stats, interviews and history from many cultures to support the hypotheses.

[norton ash]

Parents are, generally speaking, largely a bunch of fucking abusers and appeasers. Parents are, generally speaking, largely a bunch of fucking incompetents. Try 'institutions' or 'mothers' or 'the poor people downtown' and repeat.

Hyberbolic, offensive to all tarred, not unrelated to misogyny, and not untrue as brutal generalizations... OR not true at all if we really do our research. So the impulse to defend a large number of us is powerful, because we're none of these things.

Hyperbole and rhetoric have their place, fair enough.

Rapists are, generally speaking, LARGEly fucking damaged by something for their compass to turn from love and compassion to evil.

And alcohol, generally speaking, is largely a dangerous fucking drug.

Anyway, misogyny. Right. I blame our mothers.

[charlie meadows]

god knows why should we have sides on this fundamental issue?

You could have said that non-cryptically in two short, declarative sentences, you know.

charlie meadows, how about you cut the cryptic and just say what you mean...

I don't like the inflammatory nature of that statement, I admit that I have thought so myself from time to time, but I also know a large number of awesome men who wouldn't fit the category. I'll say that, but I'm under no obligation to protect the thread or the movement, for that matter, from anything anyone else says.

Ahhhh, it's about obligation then... Try opportunity as motivation. You and c2w? had the opportunity to draw in others to the conversation by reining in Barracuda's invective. You could have pointed out to him that rape is for the most part a serial crime (an average of six victims per perp), making the percentage of male rapists something more like 3-4-5% give or take. The difference between 3-4-5% and all men being a bunch of rapists is considerable.

All Barracuda left out was everything in between.

Instead the effort is being made to conflate a wide variety of experiences by accessories and witnesses and even hearsayers into complicity, and this invented complicity into rape itself.

Your method of discourse is flawed and removes those you seek to persuade from the conversation.

[Canadian_watcher]

Norton,

Do you agree with Stephen that marital rape isn't really domestic assault? He defended that position way back in this thread.
No one "on your side" (fuck, why?) took issue with his position. And now you expect to derail this discussion with some more hurt male feelings over ONE thing ONE person said which has, at this point, been discussed, and several people have stated their position on, including you????

[Canadian_watcher]

god knows why should we have sides on this fundamental issue?

You could have said that non-cryptically in two short, declarative sentences, you know.

charlie meadows, how about you cut the cryptic and just say what you mean...

I don't like the inflammatory nature of that statement, I admit that I have thought so myself from time to time, but I also know a large number of awesome men who wouldn't fit the category. I'll say that, but I'm under no obligation to protect the thread or the movement, for that matter, from anything anyone else says.

Ahhhh, it's about obligation then... Try opportunity as motivation. You and c2w? had the opportunity to draw in others to the conversation by reining in Barracuda's invective. You could have pointed out to him that rape is for the most part a serial crime (an average of six victims per perp), making the percentage of male rapists something more like 3-4-5% give or take. The difference between 3-4-5% and all men being a bunch of rapists is considerable.

All Barracuda left out was everything in between.

Instead the effort is being made to conflate a wide variety of experiences by accessories and witnesses and even hearsayers into complicity, and this invented complicity into rape itself.

Your method of discourse is flawed and removes those you seek to persuade from the conversation.

first, don't ascribe motives to me. OBLIGATION? you're taking a piss, right?

second, don't' be such a hypocrite. See my post to Norton, above. It applies to you, brekin, WUaL, Searcher08, Saurian Tail, druff, Nordic, 82, Morgan and every other male who has posted nothing but hurt feelings on their own behalf without once stating that they oppose any of the outrageous things those of you in this group have said.

[charlie meadows]

first, don't ascribe motives to me. OBLIGATION? you're taking a piss, right?

I'm taking a piss? I'm not familiar with that expression.

[Canadian_watcher]

it means joking. anything else?