.png){kind=logo}
September 29, 2011 at 8:14 pm 
PZ Myers Rebecca Watson takes a moment to vent about the internet bile aimed at her, and it’s a depressing read. Who would have imagined a mild admonition to “guys, don’t do that” would turn into months of seething hatred and demonization? As she documents, there are whole sites and ongoing threads dedicated to trashing her and anyone associated with her. I took a quick look at some of her links, and found this treasure on one thread committed to hatin’ everything Watson:
“freethoughtblogs” has become a spiteful ghetto built on a river of bile for insecure gutter-fascists.
That is supernova-grade irony.
Rebecca Watson has my support as an appreciated and valuable member of the skeptical community, who has made many contributions and has also been an entertaining and informative face for skepticism.
The saddest part of this whole contemptible witch-hunt, though, is that several of the people who are still spittle-spewing ranters against the Skepchicks were also appreciated members of the skeptical community, who have unfortunately done a fine job of isolating themselves with their obsessive hate-mongering and slander. Let it go, people. Grow up, move on, shed the misogyny. And make no mistake, you have exposed yourselves as irrational misogynists.
Posted in
Mainsplainer, he’s a Mansplaineeeeer, tellin’ it like it iiiiis…
Yes, folks. Apologies. I knew it was wrong when I posted. It wasn’t helpful. One does begin to feel a bit vicious, however.
Marta:
Yes, I know. It’s not easy.
MRA’s think that men are built to be insecure assholes who simply must be dominant over every woman in their vicinity, or their manhood will shrivel up and die.
But feminists are the ones who hate men.
Right.
I liked mansplainers better when they called themselves the He-Man Women-Haters Club.
Only from under the bar. Not above board. In brown paper bags. With a straw.
msironen
[i] How does Dawkins providing child-care at venues address the problem of women feeling uneasy about attending because of issues like being hit on umpteen times an hour, and many men apparently assuming that a female attendee must be ‘up for it’ because she’s had the temerity to attend without a male partner?
Also, doesn’t that make the assumption that women are the only ones who benefit from having their children looked after?
[ii]Questions of theistic/atheistic morality certainly are interesting, but they’re not the topic of this thread, except in the sense that many people apparently think that sending rape threats and such are morally defensible things to do.
@Psychoticatheist:
Aww, fuck. Blockquote fail.
My part starts at “I think you need to reconsider. Let me explain.”
@Esteleth
Almost, but not quite. It is not that they are extreme examples. It is that many of them are basically lies. They are trolls: People who put forward a deliberately provocative position or opinion with the intent of provoking a strong reaction. A feminist talks about misogyny and the trolls say they want to rape her and call her a cunt for good measure. They may be skeptics, or they may not be. Their primary goal is to upset people so they can enjoy the fireworks.
Therefore, they should be ignored, not used as examples for how badly behaved some skeptics are.
Sure, you can list examples of sexism quite easily. But we’re talking about sexism and misogyny in the skeptic movement. And pointing to your experiences of strangers on the street, or trolls on the internet should be largely irrelevant to discussing the problems within the skeptic movement.
In all this wonderful speculation about the size of my penis (and, granted, stern admonishments to cease such speculation even if it’s not actually invalid but because of PR reasons), it helps to re-focus my main point:
We might in fact all agree on the facts.
You have identified a cancer of misogynists in your midsts.
We have identified a cancer of dogmaticists (of feminism, in that case) in our midsts (EVEN IF THIS IF JUST WHAT WE THINK).
Now let’s be honest for a second and concede that from OUR OWN POINTS OF VIEW, both statements are actually true (I know you can do it, if you try). But somehow you’re actually somehow cognitively incapable of seeing this rather neutral fact and instead you keep stating that all wrong thinking persons are somehow both willfully and mendaciously ignorants of pertinent facts.
It’s like you simply cannot get your head around the fact that there are a rather sizeable amount of people who simply don’t agree with you, and the only way you can rationalize this fact is by demonizing them. They’re all, if not morally, then at least rationally deficient: “If they disagree with my opinion exactly, they must think women are sex slaves and that’s that”. This kind of thinking might spring from the hallowed well of feminist thinking “all men are rapists, and that’s all they are”, of course…
Hmm. There are 811 responses, but only 11 are visible.
Is this a quirk of FTB? Is this the first time a thread on FTB has gone over the 800 limit? Curious.
Last night Dumbass accused me of poking fun rather than staying on topic. On that one point xe was correct; I wanted to post something substantive but I was way too tired. Since this thread is still going, I’m gonna try now; I apologize in advance for how lengthy this is liable to be.
But first, an anecdote on “cupcake” as an epithet:
At a company where I used to work, most of us suspected that the VP of Marketing, who had been promoted from admin assistant to that position very quickly — and past several people who had actual degrees and experience in marketing — had risen to that position because she was banging our slimy and ruthless CEO. One day the CEO drifted through our department while this VP was there and said something to the effect of “How’s it going, Cupcake?” It was not a joke and it was, of course, not remotely professional or appropriate. We waited for her to rebuke or correct him, but she said nothing. Forever after, she was customarily referred to as “Cupcake” behind her back. While I agree that the word is not a gendered insult, in this case, it took on connotations that would not have existed if the VP had been male.
Now, for my more topical thoughts:
I always have to laugh at eBay’s mission statement (or whatever it is) that says, “People are basically good.” No we aren’t. We’re naked insecure tribal animals who have to be patiently and consistently trained to be good over the course of many years or we’ll turn out rotten (or at least unpleasant and/or unreliable). Even the best of us can have areas in our lives in which our attitudes would horrify other people. It seems to me that many otherwise intelligent, erudite people in Western societies who have very enlightened views on any number of other subjects are totally and utterly warped in their thought, speech, and behavior when it comes to sex, gender, and privilege, and yes, I think a lot of this *is* due to religion: The male-glorifying religions of death and war that displaced the female-honoring fertility religions have helped to shape cultures in which men’s rights, privileges, and concerns have been unquestioningly elevated (sorry! unintentional, honestly!!) above those of women for millenia, and those religions have made teaching and communicating candidly and rationally about sexual issues as difficult and dangerous as possible. Beyond religion, you have the cultural persistence of ancient, medieval, and Victorian hierarchical Western social structures that have “ground in” certain biases in favor of the titled, the powerful, the wealthy, Caucasians, Europeans, believers, straights, and men, leading to those biases being considered “natural.” Add this up and you have a situation in which some portion of even our otherwise best-educated and “best-bred” population espouses ideas and/or engages in behavior that deeply discomforts or frightens others, but they simply can’t bring themselves to admit that there might be anything wrong with that. Rather than try to change their ways, the perpetrators justify their views and attack the people who are offended as being “too sensitive”, “out to get them,” etc.
A person might think that the offense taken by another person to something they’ve said or done is silly or uninformed or even malicious. But a polite and open-minded person will listen to the offended party’s reasoning and feelings, put themselves in the other person’s shoes, and so on, and if there might be even a shred of rightness and reasonableness behind the offended party’s objections, the offender should — as a matter of common decency — offer an apology and avoid repeating the act in the future. Even if it embarrasses them to do it. Even if they don’t think they did wrong. Even if they still can’t really understand “what all the fuss is about.” That is one way that functional societies remain functional; we make concessions and sacrifices to one another to maintain peace, order, and mutual respect. If you must, think of it as an investment; the assets you put into the transaction will come back to you later, when some party inevitably thinks nothing of offending *you*.
My grandparents were racist. I have to struggle not to be unreasonably suspicious of unfamiliar and poorly dressed African-American men. My mother is very much against “the homosexual agenda.” I have to struggle against using stereotypes of gay people for humorous effect. But I won’t give up those struggles or justify those thoughts, and I hope people will call me on the failings that betray my lingering prejudices when they happen. I’ll do the best I can to make those failings right.
I spent a lot of time as a fundie “saving myself for marriage.” I didn’t get laid in high school or college and haven’t gotten any since. Having become an atheist, I *could have* made it my mission to make up for lost time. I *could have* presumed that a social event for atheists, humanists, and/or intellectuals would be a good place to do that. I *could have* even presumed that asking an otherwise unaccompanied lady at such an event on the way back to our rooms late at night to join me for coffee would be a promising scenario for leading up to that. (Once I was given an example that *could have* persuaded me to that this could work: At an Annual Gathering, a male Mensan told me sotto voce that “the best thing about these Gatherings is that the women are willing.” He proceeded to invite a pair of women he fancied to join a group of us for “dinner and other things,” and he sure got a lot of touch from those two ladies in the back seat of the van on the way to and from the restaurant.) But I haven’t, and I won’t ever, because I respect women, and I know I’m not entitled to anything from them, and that doesn’t threaten me or my masculinity in the least.
(OK, losing the V would be nice. But if and when that ever happens, it will happen in a way that values and affirms my partner from start to finish.)
msironen,
Well, nice as it is to see you acknowledge Watson is owed an apology, now that his audaciously prioritised aim has been achieved, presumably the apology can duly proceed?
(Snark, you are a novice at it)
Who cares what their goal is? The effect of such activity is silencing. It makes women less likely to start their own blogs, to attend conferences, to become a widely-recognized public figure, however that may happen. For that reason alone, your advice to ignore it is wrong.
FTB allows pages of posts per thread. PZ set the automatic limit to 800 posts per page. Just above the “Leave a Reply”, there is link to the older posts.
There are no feminists in your midst. You’re in your own little room, all by yourselves. You’re not in our midst, either. There’s no “us” here if you think feminism is dogmatism.
Feminism is the radical notion that women are people.
[meta]
Sally, PZ has instituted auto-paging, so that no single sub-thread exceeds 800 comments; look at the end of the post for the “Older Comments” link.
(Links to comments will still work, check the URL to see why)
Thanks for explaining, John Morales and Nerd.
“In all this wonderful speculation about the size of my penis (and, granted, stern admonishments to cease such speculation”
One person, ONE, and that would be me, made an inappropriate remark about your penis. I was called out for it, and I apologized.
Now I am double plus good sorry to have said it.
Threats of any kind of physical violence are not ‘disagreement’.
@pensnest
psychoticatheist #630
Neither do I. I’m not suggesting that trolls are not offensive. I’m just suggesting that trolls are not entirely to be a trusted data source on the attitudes of skeptics.
Not only are people threatened with rape in person, but they are actually raped sometimes too. I’m psychotic, not stupid :)
I’m just suggesting that we don’t interpret an internet phenomenon (trolls) as a skeptic phenomenon.
Absolutely, don’t disagree.
I’ve been lurking for years. This is one of the first times I’ve posted on pharyngula (I posted a few other times here and there, under a different username, and was mostly ignored)
I notice the latest chew toy still hasn’t said how he disagrees with The Feminists, only that he does and is vilified for it.
So what is it, Cupcake? What feminist point, exactly, is it that you oh so civilly disagree with?
I’m starting to think this should be a space on the bingo card: Disagrees with Feminists, but Won’t Say How.
The forced dichotomy of funding childcare vs. apologizing to Rebecca Watson is pretty weird, too. msironen makes it sound like Dawkins made some mystical pact and could only do one or the other. Why not both?
Alethea:
Oh, it’s not just lurkers. There is one person who came right to mind, in one thread, who was an utterly loathsome rape apologist and compleat MRA. Not long after much hammering away by many people, in one of the Egate threads this happened:
The thread where this person was enlightened was a tough one and Ing, SallyStrange, Beatrice, Jadehawk and many others put in sterling service.
This particular person is far from the only one who was enlightened. What we do does make a difference.
[meta]
Relax, Marta.
Your mistake was to use their own proxy for their manhood, but look what you nonetheless evinced! :)
–
psychoticatheist:
Just that? No intimations that it’s, at best, a waste of time?
(Me, I like feeling virtuous when punching-bags ask to be punched and I duly oblige)
@Alethea H. Claw
Thank you for your patience.
No, trolls should simply be ignored or banned from posting. Taking them at face value and getting upset is exactly what they intend. Their purpose is to cause controversy.
I don’t consider MRA-trolls to be trolls in the way that I am using the term. MRA-trolls, as you call them are assholes and you are quite right they should experience pushback.
And again, it’s fine to say ‘it is unacceptable conduct to threaten to rape others, regardless of your motivation for doing it’. It is another thing to say that receiving rape-threats from basically anonymous sources is an example of misogyny in the skeptic community. It is a mistake to treat these trolls at face value.
Sort of on topic, sort of not:
Just found this, whilst perusing WordPress.
SallyStrange:
It also makes rape and assault survivors cower in the corner even more. That’s one of the reasons that it is vital the survivors here repeatedly speak out about their own experiences, to give strength to those people and to help them understand it is okay to be angry and it is okay for them to have a voice.
msironen, You set up your own definition of feminism and privilege and then argue against it. It’s your sandcastle, you can kick it over if you want but what’s the point?
psychoticatheist:
Mm hmmm. According to the crap you keep spewing, women who are involved in atheism and skepticism aren’t to be trusted either, as you keep dismissing every single thing women are saying.
@Sally Strange, OM
I’m not suggesting complete blanket ignoring of trolls, I am suggesting ignoring trolls as part of a data set when trying to understand the attitudes within the skeptic movement. If women are put off by anonymous internet assholes, this is not something the skeptic movement can really do much about. We can’t reason with trolls.
And I agree with some of the points that are being raised. Sometimes there is purpose to addressing trolls, viz the lurkers who might change their minds when they see a reasoned reply to a troll.
But anonymous internet assholes shouldn’t be used as examples of problems within the skeptic community (he says from a position of anonymous internet assery). They are problems of the internet.
Is that like a flock of geese or a murder of crows?
Oh sweet hopping Jesus. Dogmatic people are extremely resistant to learning– I’ve never met another feminist who wasn’t willing to learn from other people’s experiences.
You know what’s dogmatic? The knee-jerk reaction that some men have to automatically dismiss what a woman says ‘cos you believe that she’s overreacting or misinterpreting what happened to her. You know what would not be dogmatic? Listening and learning instead of insisting that you know better (even though you’ve never experienced what we do on a daily basis).
Well, if the shoe fits…
Listen, if someone does not want to extend the common courtesy of treating me with respect and insists on defending sexist (and worse) behavior, then yeah, I’m gonna call them out on their shit.
Don’t like it? Fucking leave.
Where exactly has this been said? I want links to the relevant comments or it didn’t happen.
Anyone with half a fucking brain (not you, obviously) would be able to see that no one is accusing all men of being rapists.
Psychoticatheist @812
Do you remember my comment @643? About the difference between types of trolls?
You say,
I disagree. They may be Type 1 trolls, who are trolling for the sake of laughing at people’s responses, or they may be Type 2 trolls, who genuinely believe that women are less than men, who need to be put into their place. Their primary goal may be to scare women into silence – and they thus need to be refuted.
It’s called an analogy. I was offering an EXAMPLE of why one would cite extreme examples. I could also come up with a list of sexist encounters within the skeptic movement.
Also, uh. “…strangers on the street, or trolls on the internet should be largely irrelevant to discussing the problems within the skeptic movement.” Because sexist skeptics don’t walk down the street or be trolls online?
We don’t ignore trolls, here, we feed them until they explode. So get off that idea.
PS: If anyone wants to muck around with the bingo cards, feel free. They were meant to be a “work in progress”, but I never went back to update/fix ‘em.
Audley:
I called it in my response to msironen’s first post, I want my cookie.
I pointed out that the standard MRA response to anything we said was “you think all men are rapists!” and xe denied it. Then what do we get? “you think all men are rapists!”
Sigh.
[meta]
psychoticatheist:
Ooh, you’re so cute!
(There, there)
@Caine, Fleur du Mal
Disagreement over a minor issue of trolls within the internet based skeptic community is not the same as dismissing every single thing women are saying. Hyperbole is the GREATEST thing in the world, right?
I am a feminist, but I don’t have to agree with all feminists about navigating the seedier sides of internet culture, do I?
Gender-based bias is a real thing in the world. Unconscious sexism is real. Stereotype threat is real. Chilly climate is real. Harassment is real. Silencing is real. There’s plenty of evidence for all of these things. Open-minded people consider evidence when forming (or changing) their opinions.
If you want to disagree about the extent, effects or merits of any of this, feel free to produce evidence like a rational adult. If you want to say sexism doesn’t exist or doesn’t matter, you may as well be a flat-earther for all the weight your opinion holds.
Caine:
I didn’t even read msironen’s first post. I just kind of jumped in without fully catching up.
I’d make a batch of cookies for you, but I’m out of chocolate chips. :(
Hey I got up to post 628 and guys, not really impressed with the signal to noise ratio since last night. This was cute though:
“IndyM, pikčiurna says:
30 September 2011 at 4:16 pm
Dumbass was also amazing. He barged in here, took a great big shit on our discussion, and then screamed at the commentariat for the stink they cause with their rudeness and insults. He is a douchewaffle with dingleberries on top.”
Oh yeah, I do recall before my barging in, there was an absolutely amazing discussion on, what was it? Oh right, on tone, not content. I feel real sorry for breaking that up by rudely telling people to stick with what is important instead. I think I set the movement back by doing that. I apologize. I mean rambling on and on about tone is *so* very important! Luckily another *really useful* “discussion” on tone occurred shortly after I left. Because where would we be without people whining about tone, and then dozens of folks piling on that person? We certainly wouldn’t be anywhere near discussing anything of substance and actual value, now would we?
Damn I can be a sarcastic dick, can’t I. Anywhoo, I am going back to skimming through the thread. Props to whoever wrote post #546, too bad entries like yours are rare. Because you know, we really all have to put people in their place like it’s a fucking roast. That is point of these threads, right? That’s what *most* of everybody’s time is devoted to in here. But I am going to keep dredging through, in the hope I am wrong.
I really, really wanted to. And intended to. But this keeps coming up: this crowd expects us to simmer in our shame and yearn for some kind of forgiverange. It’s not like PZ’s post doesn’t end up with such sentiments.
THAT is what I’m here to disabuse you of. Not your feminist delusions.
psychoticatheist:
Your insistence on this along with your complete dismissal of what women are telling you is marking you as an idiot, to say the least.
You obviously have not been to or dealt with the numerous MRA and PUA sites, you have not spent days on end with people like MaxH, a gay republican fratboy who happened to be an ardent rape apologist and anti-abortionist.
We have done all that. We know these people are real and aren’t just playing provocative asshole on the ‘net. Some of them are doing that, yes, but the ones who were simply playing a game always fessed up to that after a while and faded out early on.
We’re talking about the genuine MRAs, PUAs and assorted douchecakes who have been talking about this issue for 4 months now and have invaded, harassed and stalked a woman.
The fact that you keep on with your “oh, it’s only troll play, it’s not real life, you don’t get the actual issue” is marking you not only an idiot, but a mansplainer* who has zero interest in what is being said to you.
*if you don’t grok that, click one of the two links supra. Also, women who have bought into sexism as being normal can indulge in mansplainin’ too.
You’re not making much sense, psychoticatheist.
…So… *thinking hard about WTF this means*
“Pay no attention to the misogynist behind the curtain!”
You don’t want people to associate skepticism with misogyny. I think that’s what you’re trying to say. But ignoring misogyny doesn’t accomplish that.
This is really kind of callous, you know? Some women ARE put off by expressions of misogyny, because of past experiences or whatever. I do not accept that their non-participation in conferences is no big deal. If misogynist trolls are having that effect, then the argument for ignoring them is weaker, not stronger.
Also, it’s not about reasoning with them. It’s about excluding them. Making it clear that bigots who hate women aren’t welcome.
So your position is being weakened even further.
No, you are wrong. They are problems in our culture. There’s no division between the internet and the culture. The internet is an expression of the culture.
You’ve revealed some sloppy thinking and failed to make a compelling case. I hope you consider these things and come back with something more well-thought-out.
@Esteleth
Hi again!
Yes. Do you remember what I posted in reply to it? It was message 648 in case you missed it.
I agree that assholes (what you call Type 2 trolls) should be confronted. I also agree it can sometimes be difficult to tell the difference between Type 1 and Type 2. I am talking about Obvious trolls such as “I want to rape you to Death you stupid cunt.”
There is not refutation to that, there is no need to respond to it other than with ‘This comment is clearly inappropriate.’ We shouldn’t take these kinds of comments as being indicative of a problem within the skeptic movement since they exist throughout the internet. They are the background noise to our experiment, and when we are trying to get an idea of the picture of the skeptic movement they should be ignored since they serve as distortion. Deliberately so, in fact.
psychoticatheist:
Well, I’m not a feminist, and if I could challenge what they’re saying, I would. I’m an equal-opportunity kibitzer.
(Instead, it their opposition that makes disputable claims and whom I can challenge (or mock, as is merited); and then there’s your kind: the ostensible “allies” who are O so concerned about tactics.
Bah)
Audley:
Don’t worry, you didn’t miss anything. I think we need brownies…the special ones.
msironen, you want to leave, but you can’t?
(Weak, you are)
Proverbs 28:1
psychotic, you’ve been saying for two days now that the freethought community doesn’t really have a problem with sexism, and that it’s all an illusion because sexist outsider-creeps are invading our Net forums.
The original episode that spawned this whole brouhaha happened at a freethought event. Many firsthand witnesses have told, in related posts and in comments in related forum threads, of similar things happening to them at other freethought events, or of being sexually exploited/discomfited/harrassed, molested, or raped by other supposedly freethinking people. Based on the anecdotal evidence presented as part of Egate alone, the skeptic community has a real problem with sexism. Your continued assertions that it doesn’t have taken on the familiar flavor of climate-change denial.
Oh really? You feel no shame? You refuse to apologize? How shocking. Well, consider me disabused. You can leave now.
psychotic:
You’re ignoring the seedier side of life. You’re persistently ignoring reality. That’s not a plus, in case you haven’t figured that out yet.
After linking Schroedinger’s Rapist? Have you read any other freethoughtblogs, like Dispatches, recently? The word “irony” have any meaning to you?
Aptly-named Dumbass:
<snicker>
You sure like to delude yourself.
No, you can’t.
(Hint: pitiable ≠ sarcastic)
Also, why does it have to be childcare? Every time someone wants to make a big deal about being more inclusive of women, they talk about childcare. Childcare at events would be great for all types of families. But tossing it out there as some sort of salve is like “OK ladies, you can join the club and I assume you’ll be bringing your babies along?”
Women do a lot more than make babies. If you want to make events more inclusive for women, admit that they exist and are important. There are studies that show how women are ignored in groups, tackle that. If there is a Q&A after a panel, make it a point to take the first two questions from women. If there are already less women then men, most of the Q&A will be male voices but at least some women will be heard while there is still time to give them full answers.
psychoticatheist
Whether they’re doing it ‘for a laugh’ or because they truly believe what they say, makes no difference. What matters is that they feel such things are acceptable, even if ‘only’ in ‘fun’.
Oh my.
Honestly, if there weren’t a stupid toxic meme already associated with penis size, and if it wouldn’t just result in making a different group of people feel bad, I’d rather caricature MRAs as having absurdly oversized penises than little ones. Like Priapus. They just can’t shut up about their penises. They can’t think about anything else. They can’t hear us because THEIR BONER IS TOO LOUD, as kristinc(?) once put it, to my eternal amusement.
I think it’s part of the Secret Feminist Dogma™ that the Secret Society of Dogmatic Feminists™ discuss at their meeting. I think there’s a secret handshake and everything.
msironen: Too dishonest to admit that “potential rapist” and “actual rapist” are two different things.
Par for the course with these guys. They disagree with feminism, but they can’t say why since it is just a bit socially unacceptable to just come straight out and say, “Women are worth less than men.” So, they have to lie and lie and lie, and make up armies of Straw Feminists, to justify disagreeing with feminism.
Boring, msironen. Don’t you have any new tricks? Tap dancing perhaps? Michael Hawkins is pretty good at that, perhaps he can give you lessons.
Place yer bets! Place yer bets!
10:1 odds that msironen fails to stick the flounce!
Place yer bets!
Oh, so you know what we want, eh? Here’s a newsflash: I’m in this for the lulz, sweetheart. Nothing else.
I have no delusions that you will ever change your song-and-dance– you’d rather mansplain than have a real conversation.
But go ahead, keep trying to “disabuse” me of the notion that I should be treated equally and I will continue to mock you and act all uppity and shit.
To jump on the bandwagon: How exactly do you disagree with feminism? Or are you just parroting that old “feminists are bitches” canard?
kerfluffle
Thanks for expanding on that. I knew as I wrote it that I’d missed something, but for some reason couldn’t express it.
@Caine, Fleur du Mal
What do you think I am dismissing, exactly?
You are right in that. But I am not arguing that we should not address assholes and refute them, call them out for being assholes etc. So I’m not sure what the relevance of this is. C
And I’m not talking about them, argue against them at your leisure, they need to be refuted. I was talking about things like anonymous youtube commenters. If you are confident that a certain someone is ‘MRA’ or ‘PUA’ or whatever then that’s fine. But at the same time one should remember that if they are anonymous they may well be yanking your chain. We’re clearly talking about different phenomena, though they often look similar I’m sure.
I don’t disagree with the points being raised against idiots and assholes. I am not saying that all people you consider assholes should be considered ‘only troll play’. I’m saying trolls shouldn’t be used as datapoints when we try and assess the situation in the skeptic community. We have no idea who these people are, if they are skeptics and in many cases it isn’t entirely clear that the person typing the message sincerely means it. By all means address the points they make, but be careful about lamenting at the awful state of the skeptic community based on anonymous internet assholes. That’s really all I was saying.
msironen,
Irony is you imagining that you’re educating an expert though you can’t apprehend the difference between “all men are rapists!” [your attributed claim] and ‘any given man may be a rapist’ [the actual claim], when in reality you’re exposing your obtuse ignorance.
See here, psychoticatheist, you’re making an assumption.
It’s a BIG one.
You’re assuming that the over-the-top asshole Type 2 trolls aren’t skeptics, don’t identify as skeptics, and aren’t pro-skepticism.
That is not true.
Also, let me ask you a question. And please, think about it.
As far as I can tell, you are male. Also, as far as I can tell, Sally Strange, Caine and I are all women. I’m not sure about Pteryxx.
You are being told by a group of women, “Hey, this hurts” and your response, as a man, is to say, “Yeah, but it doesn’t matter! Also, you should get a thicker skin.”
As a self-proclaimed feminist, does that not strike you as a bit problematic?
Then you’ve well and truly lost the plot.
Kerfluffle:
Yes they do. Some of us don’t make them at all, being childfree. However, when we have had threads for the express purpose of discussing ideas of how to make meetings/conferences more inviting to women, childcare is brought up a lot.
The lack of childcare is a problem for a lot of women and it deserves to be addressed. What should also be addressed is why more men aren’t concerned about childcare at meetings/conferences. In our society, too many fathers still remain at a remove from parenting, the default care falling on women. (Not in all cases by far, I am aware of that).
This is not about anonymous youtube commenters and it never was.
Well said, Daz.
In fact, it’s the ones who are doing it “just in fun” who are the true target audience. They may not actually hate women, but they’re giving aid and comfort to those who do. They may not plan on raping anyone, but they’re providing camouflage to those who do.
The ones who sit in silence and do not speak up in protest at these jokes are also the target audience, for the same reasons.
My comment, for one. To reiterate: a rape threat and a misogynist slur does not an obvious troll make. Real people issue rape threats and misogynist slurs quite sincerely. We know that they’re sincere because they sometimes carry them out.
Oh terrific, Dumbass is back. Hi, Dumbass.
Judging by *your* contributions it is. You keep harping about this thread’s supposed lack of content, but you haven’t posted a single iota of on-topic content yet. Instead you’ve done absolutely nothing but bash other commenters.
At least when you started, you were unintentionally funny. Since then, you’ve just been boring.
Sweet jumpin’ Jebus, he’s been going on about lowlifes on YouTube all this time? And here I was trying to have an actual conversation with him!
*pulls out six-pack of beer*
Sally, Caine, can I offer you one?
msironen:
1) I didn’t link to Schroedinger’s Rapist. It’s not all that hard to keep our ‘nyms straight.
2) SR is about potential threat. Not surprisingly, your two brains cells* didn’t grasp that. And since you’re completely unwilling to listen, you never will understand the threat that we deal with all the fucking time.
3) I don’t really give a good goddamn about other FtBs and what they’re saying over there. Dispatches has fuck all to do with this conversation.
4) No links to relevant comments? Hey look, it didn’t happen!
Caine:
I will not be partaking ‘cos I am full of beer. I’ll pass the brownie tray to the left.
*You’ve got enough to rub together! Huzzah!
@msironen: I don’t suppose you read Schroedinger’s Rapist?
That link again: Schroedinger’s Rapist
Caine, I totally agree and should have made it more clear.
Childcare should be considered for making events more inclusive for families of all sorts – nuclear, single moms, single dads, same-sex, and so forth. Not a “woman” thing.
Esteleth, fuck yeah. Pass that over here.
*pop*
Ahhhh….
Fuck, I wish I could hang around more.
I have to get back to packing things into the car. Boyfriend’s moving out of state to a new job.
No actually, it’s because I hate him. Because he’s a man. Amazing I kept my man-hatred a secret from him all these years. It’s my feminine wiles, you know. I’m devious that way.
“I’d rather caricature MRAs as having absurdly oversized penises than little ones. Like Priapus. They just can’t shut up about their penises. They can’t think about anything else. They can’t hear us because THEIR BONER IS TOO LOUD, as kristinc(?) once put it, to my eternal amusement.”
Heh.
You put it way better than I did.
Sally,
Yeah, I’ve kind of been lying to Mr Darkheart for all of these years. He thinks I love him when all I want to do is emasculate him or accuse him of being a rapist or something.
@Sally Strange, OM
That’s possible. I am genuinely psychotic, so that happens quite a lot.
No, that’s not what I am saying. I’m saying we should deal with the actual misogyny in the skeptic community, by all means. But we should not appeal to anonymous youtube commentators (for example) as evidence of the terrible misogyny within the skeptic commmunity. Ludicrous trolls are common at youtube regardless of the topic, whether it is a guy singing a song, a cat falling off a chair or a feminist talking about sexism. They are an internet phenomenon, and we should callibrate our sensors to account for this when we look for evidence of misogyny in the skeptic community.
I’m not sure what is callous about accepting the fact that skeptics cannot eliminate internet trolls. Of course women are put off by expressions of misogyny, but I’m saying they should analyse the source of those expressions before concluding that there is a particular problem with the skeptic community.
I don’t disagree.
Not really, since it was never counter to what I was saying which is that we can address misogyny without allowing trolls to smear the skeptic community.
Sure, but I was talking about a sub-culture (skeptics) and saying that since the problem is about super-set of all culture (the whole internet) it is not a problem unique to the sub-culture (the skeptics) and that this should be kept in mind.
To be honest, I think people are thinking that I am saying something far more contentious than what I am actually saying.
We shouldn’t lament about the state of the skeptic community when a phenomenon that affects all communities rears its ugly head. As skeptics, we should of course destroy the arguments that trolls might attempt to bring forward. For the benefit of the lurkers if nothing else.
But we shouldn’t get outraged, appalled or upset about these things. That’s what the trolls are intending. We should, in my view at least, calmly and dispassionately destroy their points and move on without getting overly excited and essentially devolving into a flamewar.
Re Schrödinger’s Rapist. I made this analogy elsewhere.
As a biker, both motorcycle and pedal, I get praised, if the subject comes up, by car-drivers, for my situational awareness. I’ve never had a car driver yet accuse me of insulting them by acting as if any particular car might just be the one that does something stupid and maims or kills me.
Schrödinger’s Rapist says exactly the same thing, but about a different subject, and all of a sudden people ‘can’t understand’ it. Forgive me, but I see it more as ‘don’t want to acknowledge it’.
[meta]
psychoticatheist:
It’s OK, I don’t think all psychotics are dim just because you are.
(You do realise you’re being quoted, no? :) )
In your Walter Mitty fantasies, you are a Vulcan, but we have yet to undergo the Kolinahr.
(Gotcha)
Have you no pity for my poor fingers? Yes, I post a link to Schroedinger’s Rapist and I’ll keep doing it. I have explained and explained and explained and explained and explained and…well, you get the idea.
Schroedinger’s Rapist does not say “all men are rapists”. What it does explain is why [primarily] women can not tell who may be a person who will rape. I can’t tell by looking at someone, can you? Do you think a rapist walks around with a fluorescent tattoo on their forehead? No?
I am so sick of people like yourself assuming that Schroedinger’s Rapist is nothing except the single sentence “all men are rapists!” Do you have no reading comprehension? Are you afraid of understanding? Are you afraid of feeling empathy?
Men are often victims of crimes like muggings. You could take Schroedinger’s Rapist and easily make it Schroedinger’s Mugger, the point being that a man cannot tell by looking what men will turn out to be a mugger.
Were you around when I described what happened to me? This is what I wrote from another thread, however, it’s applicable here as well:
When I was 16, I was leaving a social engagement and was walking to my car, at night. I was hit in the back of the head. When I regained consciousness, I was tied up and being raped. I was then beaten. Then I was raped again. Then I was beaten some more and repeatedly strangled. I was raped a few more times. I was cut several times by the knife my rapist was utilizing.
I was lucky. I was one of three survivors of this person.
Risk assessment and caution are a part of my life. To be told, repeatedly that for me to expect men to at least think about what women must do every day makes me hysterical, over-emotional, a castrating bitch, a pointless whiner, a cunt who wants to oppress men, etc., I don’t take it too well.
Now, I don’t run around claiming all men are rapists. They aren’t. I know they aren’t. I have explained this to one asshole after another until I’m blue in the fingers. However, I do not think it’s asking too much for men to think of women as full human beings and act accordingly.
I have taken the time to write out a thoughtful response to you, msironen, when you haven’t done anything to merit one, so I’d appreciate it, for once, if you actually read what I have written and think about it. Hard.
Nobody was doing this. As I said, you’ve lost the plot.
Actually the dishonest thing is to invent such a thing as a “potential rapist” in the first place.
So… what exactly is the lesson I’m supposed to take home from it? Don’t hide in the bushes, because a woman might think you’re hiding there in order to rape her?
Oh I know, when one of my buddies make a rape joke next time (which, basically, happens ALL THE TIME CAUSE WE’RE ALL RAPISTS) I’ll know to tell him “that’s not cool” (even though I’m a rapist too, even if not actual YET (=potential)).
Oy, what the hell happened to the numbering system? Anywhoo:
#15 (the 2nd?)
Friendly says:
1 October 2011 at 12:14 am
“Last night Dumbass accused me of poking fun rather than staying on topic. On that one point [h]e was correct; I wanted to post something substantive but I was way too tired. Since this thread is still going, I’m gonna try now; I apologize in advance for how lengthy this is liable to be.”
Dude, don’t apologize for actually taking the time to write! Your post is *exactly* the type of thing I was arguing for all along! Sadly, even when I mention the lack of good posts, when I point out people spend far too much time on shit like arguing with people about tone / roasting them, instead of more acknowledgements of my common sense point, I get THIS in response:
“John Morales says:
1 October 2011 at 12:58 am
Aptly-named Dumbass:
You sure like to delude yourself.
No, you can’t.
(Hint: pitiable ≠ sarcastic)”
Good Job John. Either you absolutely, positively suck at fighting the good fight, or you are one of those assholes who comes on here for sport and fills up the thread with useless shit. Either way, you’re being counterproductive. Not because of tone, because you post off-topic shit. So maybe, I don’t know, stop doing that? Maybe go find Friendly’s post (the second #15), or someone else’s where something useful is said, and respond to that? If you want to help people, to enlighten, to raise consciousness, don’t make it a chore for people to sift through a bloated mess of shit. I am frankly out of time now, can’t respond to Friendly at the moment, since it took so long to catch up reading from yesterday. Which would be ok if most of it was good, but 90% of it was garbage.
@Esteleth
I’m going to bed now, so you have the ‘honour’ of my last post on this (I was going to leave it sooner, but you’ve been incredibally patient and even tempered so I feel you deserve an answer to your question)
Nope. I’m not talking about Type 2 trolls at all. They could be skeptics for all I know, they are irrelevant to the point I was raising, which was about how we should handle Type 1 trolls.
That’s right.
Well naturally, if you are getting hurt by Type 1 trolls, and you intend to hang around the internet, then you do need a thicker skin. They ain’t going away, and the more you get upset by them, the more you post in an upset manner about them, the more they will keep coming and the more they will upset other people. Even if you leave the skeptic movement, but stay on the internet you will have to deal with Type 1 trolls. They are basically everywhere.
But that’s not really what I am actually saying in any case. My main point was that we shouldn’t lament the state of the skeptic community based on the actions of trolls who affect all communities in basically equal measure.
Skeptical powers, activate!
I fail to believe psychoticatheist!!
[blinks]
Looks like xe’s still here.
I guess skeptics *can’t* eliminate Internet trolls.
@Esteleth (and welcome): no problem, I prefer to remain androgynous. ~;>
I would love one, alas, I’m no longer allowed to drink. I’ll stick to the brownies.
Caine –
thanks for the info…
It’s not that I couldn’t see trolling elements in what he was saying, but I didn’t know him & didn’t want him to think that pharyngula (or feminists) haven’t considered what is, in its genuine form, a serious question.
I feel perfectly comfortable with “troll, f* off” if I’ve had enough experience w/ them to know they’re a true troll and not just defensive. A *lot* of sexist guys that will act better when they know better are indistinguishable from trolls.
Plus, there are probably some people reading but not commenting that might see a kernel of an important issue in there.
So, anyway, …Just trying to use my horde powers “justly & gently”. But knowing he’s proved himself a jerk obviates any need for me to actually try to answer him, so, again, thanks.
…….
To all the other atheists out there who still wander into temple come high holies, or try to observe the spirit of shabbos ‘cuz it’s good for your mental health, thought I’d put in my happies & shaloms.
Okay, with no one to respond to right now, guess I get to make some popcorn, catch up from the last few hours & relax a bit. Try to set an example for my dog who really, really needs to mellow the f* out just now.
Nah, psychoticatheist. We should point and laugh and mock the trolls. That’s the way to get them to shut up, not calmly and dispassionately disproving their points – which is basically impossible anyway, because they don’t have “points” as such.
Also, still waiting on msironen to elucidate what, exactly, is wrong with feminism. I’m thinking it’s long odds that xe will actually reply with something substantive.
We aren’t and never did, you flaming idiot. You are the one denying reality and bringing up youtube morons.
…
Uh.
Does anyone have any idea what psychoticatheist’s point was? Like, at all?
*is confused*
Relatedly: does anyone know how to turn off the autocorrect in the comment box?
Sally @70
Thanks, but the point seems to have missed Psycho by several parsecs…
But Friendly! He just said that he’s leaving!
Now, let’s see if he sticks the flounce.
Crip Dyke:
Yeah, I know. I was just much more thoughtful and civil to msironen than xe deserves. Can’t help attempting to educate.
msironen
You’re really not very bright, are you?
Be sure and tell that to the cops, lawyers, juries, and media who go “Why did she let that guy get her alone anyway? Didn’t she KNOW what might happen??”
Dumbass, you want on-topic?
Here:
I whole-heartedly endorse this.
(Do you?)
–
This is an indisputable statement of fact.
(Do you dispute it?)
It looks like you’re basically admitting that you didn’t read the piece. Good show!
What dictionary are you using that lists “potential threat” and “rapist” as synonymous?
The point is that we can’t know who is or is not a threat, so don’t act like a fucking threat. Why is this so fucking difficult?
I’m disappointed that you still haven’t coughed up any links. Has no one expressly stated that all men are rapists? I’m shocked that you would distort the truth like that!
By the by: Which bits of feminism do you disagree with specifically?
Caine:
You don’t think that makes me sick to my stomach? Am I some kind of sociopath that must be shamed by association (by gender?) for you to prove your point?
# of Dumbass’ posts on the topic at hand: 0
# of Dumbass’ posts haranguing other people for not staying on topic: a couple of dozen by now?
Fuck off, you flaming hypocrite. We WERE having a productive discussion here.
And there’s msironen, lying some more, because that’s how he HAS to roll, as an MRA:
Potential (adj.)\pə-ˈten(t)-shəl\
1: existing in possibility : capable of development into actuality
2: expressing possibility; specifically : of, relating to, or constituting a verb phrase expressing possibility, liberty, or power by the use of an auxiliary with the infinitive of the verb (as in “it may rain”)
Claiming that the word potential means something other than what the dictionary says it means is not a very convincing way to persuade people that you’re not full of shit.
Try actually reading it. The answer to that question is pretty clearly spelled out.
Probably a good idea, yes. But not the message of SR. Further proof that you never actually read it, just decided that its main message is that all men are rapists.
That would be a good idea, yes. Tell your buddies that rape jokes aren’t cool. Is that really such a big problem for you? But again, telling your friends to knock off the rape jokes was also not the main thrust of SR.
You really should try reading it. Or, if you refuse to read it, avoid criticizing it in public. It just makes you look like a willfully uninformed, lying ass.
Esteleth:
Apparently, it’s something to do with youtube commenters. Psychotic must have missed the ongoing slimepit.
Far as I’m concerned, that’s more the question you should be asking, and you should be genuinely concerned about the answer. I know I am.
A more charitable interpretation: you’re an obtuse and stupid fuck who ought to go read a thing before kvetching about what it says. And if you don’t understand something, ask fucking questions, don’t just go asserting it says whatever you fucking want it to.
Wow, did you just invent the inverse “slut”-defense?
[OT]
Esteleth,
Spellchecking is browser-based, not site-based.
(If you’re on FireFox, all you need to do is disable the dictionary feature)
Esteleth
I think your auto-correct might be a browser-feature or a spellcheck plug-in of some sort.
I have Phrase Express installed, which made some weird auto-corrections, ’til I deleted the ones I didn’t want.
Msironen. Let me put this in simple words for you.
How does someone know that someone else is a rapist? Simple. When that someone else rapes.
Who is a potential rapist? Everyone. Everyone has the capability to rape.
How does someone know that someone else is not a rapist? They cannot. A preponderance of evidence to someone’s non-rapist tendencies can be assessed, but that requires extensive knowledge of the person. But, as everyone (you, me, Waffler, PZ, etc) is CAPABLE of rape, believing that someone will not rape requires, you guessed it, believing it. Which requires knowledge.
The point of the Schrödinger’s Rapist essay is that it is IMPOSSIBLE TO KNOW if the person you are just now meeting will turn out to be rapist or not.
And since the majority of rapes are committed by men against women – and approximately 25% of women will be raped in their lifetimes – women must, for their own safety and wellbeing, constantly assess the rapist tendencies of men.
Simple as that.
Well… yes, those are both good lessons. Please don’t hide in bushes, because it might freak people out. And when your buddies make rape jokes, please tell them not to. This is basic human decency.
Another lesson – indeed, the basic premise – is to not get offended if a woman doesn’t immediately trust you. You are not entitled to her trust. You’d think this would be obvious, but given how many men have been deeply offended by the notion that women might not find them immediately and thoroughly trustworthy, it’s apparently not obvious.
Look, if I’m dining alone at a restaurant, I’ll take my wallet with me when I go to use the restroom. Doing so doesn’t mean I’m accusing all the other diners of being thieves or potential thieves; it means I’m being sensible and exercising due caution. I can’t imagine anyone, upon seeing that I’ve chosen not to leave my wallet on the table, leaping up and getting all offended that I thought they might be a thief. Yet this is exactly what you are doing when you say that SR is offensive to men. Do you really think that taking my wallet with me is offensive to the other people in the restaurant? If not, then neither is SR offensive.
Read Daz’s excellent biker/car analogy again if you don’t like my restaurant/wallet one.
(I can’t believe we have to go over this AGAIN. Oh well, into the fray once more.)
Well, I see I typed my fingers blue again for no reason whatsoever.
Hey Dumbass! See what good being all civil and thoughtful does? Gets the same idiocy vomited all over your shoes again. Yeah, that’s just totally worth the effort of being all civil and thoughtful.
:eyeroll:
Psychoatheist is contradicting his own self, right in this very sentence:
If the trolls are affecting all communities in equal measure, and the effect is lamentable, then presumably the effect on the skeptic community is also lamentable. QED.
I was going to ask, rhetorically, just how stupid you are.
Thanks to you, that question is now superfluous. As are my typical patient, careful explanations.
I need some fucking chocolate.
[OT]
Aha! I figured out how to turn off the autocorrect. Seems that I just had to Control-click and when the little menu popped up uncheck “Correct Spelling Automatically.”
Woohoo!
*hands Classical Cipher a mug of hot chocolate*
Classical Cipher:
I have a jar of Nutella. We can share. You would not believe how much I’d like a drink right now. Curse those stupid, dense, willfully ignorant, asshole MRAs for breaking my pancreas.
Metaphorical chocolate, and hugs if you want them, are coming your way, Classical Cipher!
msironen is just a liar. That’s all I’ve ever seen him do, is lie about feminism. Like I said, misogynists who value social status can’t just come out and say that they think that bitches ain’t shit, so they have to lie about feminism to make their views seem (to some people who are very dull-witted, anyway) more respectable.
I’m pretty sure this particular individual’s obtuseness is intentional. ‘Uncertainty’ – not a difficult concept.
And magic brownies for Caine of course!
Sally:
Aaaaah, thank you so much!
Yeah, and you can’t know which of those damn brown people are terrorists so it’s best all brown people refrain from using airplanes OWAITIFORGOTTHISISTOTALLYDIFFERENT.
I have read it, in fact. To me it reads like laugh/funny piece of dear-murderers-read-this-before-murdering until I realized how fucked up it would read if you prepend all male references by “black” or “hispanic” or some such.
Intelligence and cogency. You are nothing but a mealy mouthed apologist, who needs to apologize to the blog for his idiocy, and shut the fuck up. That is what you need to do. Are you adult enough to do it? It know you aren’t.
Then shut the fuck up.
Who cares what somebody who should shut the fuck up thinks? You should have shut the fuck up a day ago, and you are doing nothing but repeating your prior idiocy. Time to shut the fuck up, as you are adding nothing. Zip, zero, zilch, nada. Nothing.
No, we should be, just like you should be. What a fuckwitted idjit. You have nothing cogent to say, which was obvious after your first ten posts, but you can’t shut the fuck, like some creobot loser.
No, you are apologizing for the fuckiwtted trolls, making yourself a fuckwitted troll without a point. Your overblown ego is why you will not see, just like all the MRA shitheads.
That isn’t an invention, but reality. What a fuckwitted idjit, and liar and bullshitter. Loser writ large with every lying word.
[meta]
Amphigorey,
Welcome to Pharyngula! ;)
(In time, you too will become jaded)
Yeah. It really fucking is. I, personally, my own self, know two men who are rapists. For sure. Not potential rapists – real rapists. 1 out of every 6 women is damn sure about at least one man. How may brown people do you know who fly planes into buildings?
John, Amphigorey has been around for a good while and was no stranger through Egate.
Also, thanks for the chocolate, dear friends. Caine, you’ve happily reminded me that I, too, have some Nutella. It’s at home and I’m not there yet, but SOON. NUTELLA.
Idiot – we can’t tell which one, of all those people getting on the airplane, is going to be a terrorist. That’s why we all go through the metal detectors. Because it is uncertain. Dimwit.
[Thanks, Caine.
You too Amphigorey]
–
(+1)
Jesus Christ, you act like I haven’t seen this argument before.
An apt comparison would be if one “of those damn brown people” was worried about being racially profiled and being arrested with no due cause.
But I expect that point to go whoooooshing! right over your head.
You’re looking at it exactly backwards. It is the less privileged person’s point of view, not someone who is oozing privilege like a bad case of acne.
@ #34 – Dr. Audley:
Really? Or you just never met a feminist who wasn’t willing to learn from **some** other people’s experiences?
Speaking from inside feminism, and as having been in the trenches for 15+ years, I can tell you that there are fantastically huge numbers of white feminists who don’t trust what women of color (or men of color for that matter) say about racism….if what they say has even the tiniest chance of implicating them in said racism.
And then there’s trans liberation. I don’t know a feminist who didn’t go through more than a year of being a complete jerkwad on trans issues. Many of them are still racking up time after having been condemning trans people since the 70s. Mary Daly was a jerk in public right up til the bitter end (I know one person has made the claim that Daly was privately reconsidering some of her views and that this person considered her an ally on trans issues before she died, but she hadn’t so much as put out a statement that it wasn’t particularly nice to wish violent death on transsexual women as she had done in her published writing and in public lectures…much less say a single public word in favor of social change needed to increase trans safety).
Trans people are the folk many feminists love to hate. Others think that we’re oh-so-sexy, but won’t use our chosen pronouns & berate us for betraying feminism if we don’t dutifully sex them up while allowing them to call us any gendered thing with which they feel comfortable.
Feminism has done a lot of great things.
Feminists are human beings. We don’t deserve the man-hating rap we’ve got (especially the lesbians, the most man-hating stuff I’ve ever heard is from straight women who wouldn’t dare call themselves feminists) but we do not deserve the sunshine you’re trying to send our way. Feminists have done plenty of refusing to listen.
Oh, and just to drive home the point a little harder for the folks at home, I didn’t know they were rapists before they did that whole, you know, raping me thing. One of them was possibly the most trustworthy-seeming person I’ve ever met – I’d known him for literally years, and trusted him so profoundly that to say “I’d trust him with my life” sounds painfully shallow. I loved him. Sue me if I’m not willing to assume that some random guy on the street is safe and decent, when my best friend wasn’t.
Not an either/or situation.
-
Mansplainin’ by proxy.
-
We know that they are two different things, but they…don’t…come…fuckin’…labelled. You can’t tell which you’re dealing with until, metaphorically speaking, the the wave function collapses and you are raped/not-raped.
This isn’t hard to understand.
-
psychoticatheist, internect trolls aren’t as easily identified as you seem to think. Are you familiar with Poe’s Law? Just because a hate-filled screed seems completely over the top, doesn’t mean that the person writing it might not be writing in all sincerity. If you check the Wikipedia entry I’ve linked, and scroll down a bit, you’ll see
This applies to misogynistic comments/commenters just as well as it does to fundamentalist ones. If you can’t identify ‘em, you can’t exclude them; and again, if there wasn’t a raw spot for them to poke at, they wouldn’t be poking at it; they’d look for some other spot to poke to provoke a response, instead.
-
msironen:
Which feminist arguments do you disagree with and why? (Try to leave the straw people alone this time.) Can you even articulate that?
Where has anyone said that “all men are rapists”? Links and quotes, not just assertions.
Crip Dyke:
I was only speaking of my own experiences and I apologize– I shouldn’t have tried to make feminists/feminism sound like it’s all sunshine and roses.
Now, if I was locked up in some criminal facility, that would be a fair assessment to make. But it happens that I’m a rather completely normally functioning member of society. Now, we can ask if I (and many, many like me) am somehow extra super good at faking it, or maybe your criteria of a sociopath is COMPLETELY FUCKED UP? Now mind you, I could be a complete sociopath. But what does your rational sense say?
It’s IMPOSSIBLE TO KNOW ANY FUCKING NUMBER OF THINGS. ODDLY ENOUGH THIS ONLY CATCHES ATTENTION WHEN THE POTENTIAL PERPETRATOR BELONGS TO CERTAIN GENDER. ONE MIGHT EVEN CONCLUDE THAT THERE’S SOMETHING ELSE GOING ON HERE.
Even conceding those bullshit statistic, it’s still like accusing one man of being gay in 10-man lifeboat.
Crip Dyke,
I agree with you. Feminism has failed in the past, has failed today, and will likely fail tomorrow.
It fails lesbian and bisexual women. It fails women of color. It fails the disabled, the trans, the poor, it fails people who like to have lots of sex and people who don’t like to have sex at all.
That’s why it needs to be made better. Because it can be made better. It must be made better – ’cause really, what’s the fucking alternative?
…what the… frickin… GAAAH.
I must be lucky not to have seen this crap yet. I assume it looks a lot like these threads here, just with floods of … of… what, Cis Rights Apologists?
No we’re not.
We’re appealing to the many long and active discussion threads on skeptic blogs, such as this one, invariably the longest and most active threads, even on very active blogs like Pharyngyla, which are filled with misogynistic comments, like yours, by unapologetically misogynistic commenters, like you, as evidence of the terrible misogyny within the skeptic community.
CC:
I, personally, my own self, know 5 men who are rapists. For sure. Not potential rapists – real rapists.
Rapist #1, the one who raped me. In prison for life, however, the life sentence was for the murders, not the rapes. He has served 37 years so far.
Rapist #2, a neighbourhood man in SLC, he assaulted and raped my friend and neighbour who lived across the street from me. He often harassed and threatened women in the neighbourhood. I went with my friend in the back of a police car to identify him. After his arrest, his lawyer came to talk to people in the neighbourhood. After talking with me, the man in question plead out and was sentenced to 6 years. He was out in one year.
Rapist #3, a man I met briefly, someone a friend of mine was dating. She wanted to go slowly and made that very clear to this man before they started dating. She was raped on the 4th date. He did not go to trial and received no punishment whatsoever.
Rapist #4, lather, rinse, repeat of Rapist #3, different friend and different man, except the rape took place on the 1st date. Same result.
Rapist #5, a neighbourhood man in SoCal, known as friendly and helpful. A friend of mine, a single father, took this man up on his offer to babysit his 7 year old. The friendly, helpful man beat, tortured and repeatedly raped his 7 year old child, who happened to be a boy. The man was arrested, went to trial and received 40 years with the possibility of parole.
Yeah, thanks for that, Crip Dyke. Everyone experiences resistance to learning about one thing or another.
Except ME, of course. ;)
Everyday, pretty much everybody do things to mitigate risks. Do you ride around in you car with the airbags disabled and no seat belts? Do you lock up your house when you’re not home? Do you look both ways when you cross the street? When you walk around at night are you wary of being mugged?
How dare you.
Everytime I see sexism debated I want to put a gun in my mouth and fire.
Skeptics stop being skeptics. Rationalism? Gone! “Don’t be a dick? What is that, the tone argument?” “What, you mean I don’t have the right to shove my phallus into anything that’s vaguely warm?”
Yes, I agree with the feminist position, but, I’m tired of seeing the same threads play out over and over. Either we need new ways of communicating with these people or figure out if they’re simply just never going to get it and start publicly flogging misogynists at conferences like TAM and NECSS and save ourselves a lot of time and energy.
Pteryxx,
Close, but not quite. A lot of the anti-trans people reject, with equal (if not more) vehemence the term “cis.”
Y’see, “cis” is opposite of “trans.” They won’t let themselves be defined by the ZOMG TRANS.
They tend to prefer terms like “real,” “woman born woman” (frequently abbreviated WBW) or just “woman,” ’cause no prefix is needed.
But you’re right, they tend to be steaming shitpiles.
msironen
If you had a 1:6 chance of being raped by a member of a particular gender, what kind of measures would you take to avoid it happening, or to at least increase the odds?
It’s really that fucking simple. Your continued ‘not getting it’ looks amazingly like ‘not wanting to acknowledge the problem’.
=accusing all drivers of being bad drivers or drunk drivers, according to msironen
=accusing all your neighbors of being thieves, according to msironen
=accusing all drivers of being idiots/drunk drivers, according to msironen
=accusing all the members of your community of being violent criminals, according to msironen
Are you male? Because honestly, if just debating sexism makes you suicidal, then experiencing it personally on a regular basis would definitely be overwhelming for you.
There are more sociopathic individuals outside of criminal facilities and inside of them, you know.
Which society is this of which you speak? Maybe out there in physical life you really are a completely normal nice polite and respectful person.
But here, on-line, in this virtual society, you are what you write.
And we will judge you by what you write.
Actually, it is almost identifical, but for one difference.
That difference is this: in a world where not making all brown people refrain from using airplanes would actually significantly increase the number of people of all colours dying in horrible terrorist attacks on airplanes, then it really would be necessary, and justified, for airplane passengers to look at brown people and worry that they might be Shrodinger’s terrorists, and think about whether or not to give up their seats and not board airplanes if they see a brown person waiting to get on the same plane. It would be sad, and unfortunate. But it would be necessary.
But this hypothetical world does not exist, racist right-wing propaganda notwithstanding. Brown people are NOT more likely than any other people to be terrorists. There are NOT systemic cultural biases that encourage, excuse, and reward brown people for being terrorists
However, the world in which men really ARE more likely to be rapists, where systemic cultural biases REALLY DO encourage, excuse, and reward men for being rapists, IS REAL. We live in it. And so women HAVE to think about Schrodinger’s rapist. It’s not a good thing that they have to. It’s a sad, unfortunate thing. A thing that makes me angry just to think about.
But it is necessary.
Ooh, can I play? @msironen should give me ‘eir credit card number, and the date and security code and everything, because I’m asking politely and I’m so nice about asking. And if ‘e doesn’t, ‘e HATES ALL DINOBIRDS AND THINKS WE’RE ALL FILTHY THIEVES!
hides the definition of ‘raptor’
“If you had a 1:6 chance of being raped by a member of a particular gender, what kind of measures would you take to avoid it happening, or to at least increase the odds?”
= accusing me of rolling a d6 dice everytime I pass some by and attempting to rape them on a 6.
@Dr. Audley -133
You’re welcome. Pass the cookies.
@Esteleth – 135
I’m totally with you. I hope I didn’t say anything to make you think I wasn’t (hint: the we was there for a reason if you weren’t sure)
and then..
@Sally -139
bwurfff-buahahahahaha
you owe me a keyboard!
Crip Dyke:
Well, you know at least one now. I’ve been an activist feminist for well over 30 years. I read Christine Jorgensen’s autobiography when I was 9 years old and felt extremely empathetic towards her. I’ve been active in fighting for GLBTI rights for almost all my life, especially as I realized I was definitely bisexual by the time I was 10 years old.
A lot of feminists have been right assholes over the years, however, there’s a fair amount of them who have not.
I do know what you’re talking about, however. One of the most ferocious, ongoing arguments in my life was with another woman who resented and disliked any and all male to female trans people because they “hadn’t paid their dues” (read: you didn’t have a period all your life!) and just did it to have the “fun stuff” of being a woman, like painting their nails and buying clothes.
Near as I can tell, “Trolls are not members of the skeptic community, and you cannot draw conclusions about the skeptic community based on their behaviors”. I’m unsure whether or not there’s also a bit of “Skeptics are not members of the troll community” involved. In any case, he seems to find positive identification of trolls a great deal easier than I think most of us find to be the case.
-
What is this “just invent” bullshit? “She must have led him on.” “What did she expect, dressed like that?” “She really must have wanted it, or she would never have gone to that party; this is just “buyer’s remorse”.” Cops, lawyers, juries, media, friends, families, religious co-congregants….this meme is so very old, and such a community knee-jerk response, it hardly needs to be pointed out. Surely you haven’t drifted through the world so blind and deaf to such commonplaces as never to have heard them?
-
msironen:
Come on, dude. All I’m asking for is where you disagree with feminism. It’s not that hard, is it?
Links to where someone said that “all men are rapists” would also be appreciated.
No one is saying that. What we’re saying is that we have no way to judge what your intentions are. If there was a 1:6 chance that you will be murdered, wouldn’t you try to protect yourself and speak up about the potential threat whenever you could?
But go on, continue to make light of rape stats to boost your ego. It’s sooooooo endearing.
@Esteleth, thanks. I hope I’m in the process of becoming a feminist-ish thing who isn’t a jerk about trans issues, but I don’t know much about it yet. I don’t suppose there’s some sort of “CisBoobz” site to make fun of trans-haters?
msironen
Would you like to answer the question now?
Fact: 1 in 6 women in the U.S. are raped at some time in their lives, by a man.
If you were in that situation, what means of risk-assessment/avoidance would you take, given that you have no way of telling which men are intent on rape, but knowing that a large proportion are?
Taiki:
Goodness me, I’m ever so fucking sorry. Do you think we aren’t tired? You know, this issue did not start with Egate. We have been discussing these issues and fighting the good fight for a helluva lot longer than the last few months.
If you don’t want to fight, then don’t. However, don’t bother us with your whining about how tired you are.
If you really want to stick a gun in your mouth, you need to seek out professional help. This isn’t a mental health clinic. If you were just using hyperbole, then lose it. Too many people who have been raped and assaulted don’t manage to cope and actually kill themselves.
taiki:
False dichotomy.
(Rome was not built in a day; your despair is premature)
Daz:
Well, we did have that Chassoto person (Audley will remember that one) who told us it was like Russian Roulette and we women should be absolutely thrilled and happy that there weren’t actually 6 bullets in the gun and because of that we shouldn’t be concerned in the least about the possibility of being raped and taking precautions really, really weren’t necessary.
For these MRAs who are supposedly skeptics, let me frame(!) the Schrodinger’s Rapist issue in words and concepts skeptics should understand.
The idea that it is unfair for an innocent man to be automatically assumed to be a potential rapist? That is an “ought”.
The fact that a woman has to consider any male she interacts with as a potential rapist for the sake of safety and self-preservation? That is an “is”.
And “is” =/= “ought”.
Do women like thinking of any and all the men they meet, their brothers, fathers, lovers, colleagues, acquaintances, and friends, as potential rapists?
Do woman want to have to choose between being eternally suspicious of all the men in their lives and substantially reducing her own likelihood of living safely to old age?
And why do women have to do this? Why IS the “is”?
Because of the ingrained, systemic sexism that pervades this culture, that encourages, condones, excuses or ignores the rapists, that blames the victims, that puts the responsibility for self-protection entirely on the potential victims, that makes no concerted attempts to effectively deter the potential perpetrators, and because of the concerted, continuous actions of the self-proclaimed “MRA”s who shout down anyone who speaks up against the status quo.
You don’t like being regarded constantly as a Schrodinger’s Rapist? Then help create a society where women do not have to be afraid to walk alone at night.
Actually, no.
A study done not long ago (McWhorter, Violence and Victims, Vol, 24, No. 2, 2009) found that, actually, over 90% of rapes are committed by less than 10% of men. Oh, and 75% of rapes are perpetrated against people the rapist knows.
Think about this. You meet a new woman. She doesn’t know if you fall into that 10% of men. She also doesn’t know if you fall into the other 90% that still commit the other 10% of rapes. A woman that you’ve known for 30 years doesn’t know if she’s going to be in that 75% – or if you’re the man whose going to put her in that category.
Until you rape, or one of you dies without being raped or a rapist, it is impossible to know. Yes, many things in life are inherently unknowable. But did the statistic I quoted above – that about 25% of women will be raped in their lifetimes – mean anything to you?
25% of women will be raped.
Of that 25%, 75% (or 18.75% of all women) will be raped by someone they know.
Of that 25%, 90% (or 22.5% of all women) will be raped by one of just 10% of the men. That means, statistically speaking, that each of those 10% of men will rape AT LEAST TWICE.
Oh, and that 25%? It only counts the woman. Not rapes. And many women are raped more than once.
Are you seriously struggling with this?
Caine
I, erm … Ugh!
psychoticatheist,
You want to ignore trolls? Then ignore trolls to your heart’s content. Don’t worry, asswipe, we’ll do the heavy lifting while you tell us from the sidelines how and why we’re lifting wrong. Don’t forget to wring your hands every so often and be sure to murmur words of encouragement to which ever side seems to need encouragement most.
No need. No need. You cannot read.
Indeed, indeed, you cannot read.
We are sad. We’re very glum.
Oh, whatever can be done?
Well-written works are for the birds.
Let’s try again with smaller words.
Look! There’s Jane. See Jane run.
Run, Jane, run. Was that a gun?
She cannot know. She can’t be sure.
She’s been treated ill before.
Just because she’s not a he
She gets treated diff’rently.
There is a constant undertone
In school, at work, over the phone
Of glances, smiles, words, and hands.
They might be safe. They might hide plans.
She wishes they would give her space
But they don’t. Not any place.
Sometimes she’s pressed against the wall.
She didn’t ask for that at all.
It keeps her always on her guard.
Being wrong will hurt, and hard.
It’s not because all men are vile.
But she can’t tell which aren’t worthwhile!
They do not beep! They do not shine!
They do not hold “BAD PERSON” signs!
She does not know you from Ad-AM!
She does not know you, “Sam I Am”!!
When she and you are all alone
And it is late and you’re unknown
And she’s somewhere she cannot run
Do not suggest “let’s have some fun.”
That is not the time or place.
(Especially if you’re shitfaced.)
Do not ask her in the lift.
Do not grab her summer shift.
Do not ask her in a car.
Do not hug her at the bar.
Do not put her on the spot
In some deserted parking lot.
Get to know her casually!
Enjoy each other’s company!
Show her you are not a mess.
Then maybe she might say “yes.”
Or “no.” Respect her either way.
She’s human too, through every day.
In short, try not to be a lout.
Do not make her fear or doubt.
Before you ask her up for tea,
What might you think, if you were she?
END
for Pteryxxx – @136…
won’t go *deeply* into it b/c it’s off topic, but there’s quite a lot of writing that praises men “willing to be feminine” and speaks of such people as being better partners for feminist women than men unwilling to express feminism….but then disallows the idea that some of the male people they raise as examples might actually not be men. Other writing in the queer women’s community endlessly berates people on the ftm spectrum who don’t believe that feminine pronouns or names are healthy/honest for them, but endlessly praise the sexiness of female people who take T, who bind breasts, who embrace a masculine presentation.
Then there’s quite a lot about how being transsexual is to be a gender essentialist and to be more of a privileged patriarch than non-trans men. Seriously. The evidence that we’re oh-so-privileged is that we’re trans. I know, I know, trans people have had the presidency locked up for oh-so-many years, and I can’t remember the last time that we had a non-trans majority in the senate, but I think those two facts alone don’t conclusively prove that trans people are the heart of the patriarchy, do you?
Finally there’s the true, unrepentant awfulness that is the rape meme. Long and short, all MtF trans people are rapists. Every single one. We have to have complete disrespect for women’s physical autonomy or we wouldn’t try to “own” female anatomy. and those of us who aren’t the non-literal-rapists who are the closest to espousing the epitome of rape culture are actual rapists who felt “owning” female anatomy through medical intervention couldn’t satisfy our cravings to commodify, dominate, utterly control the female form…and so we literally rape.
Don’t ask me more. It’s not OT and it’s too awful for words. Besides, although I’m not one who believes we make our movement weaker when we choose to “air our dirty laundry” (one only improves by finding out where one isn’t reaching one’s potential), I do think that I’d like this thread to keep it’s focus on feminist counters to sexist crap and believe that though public criticism must be a part of what we do, there is such a thing as better or worse times/places & this one is, IMO, better used on what we started it for.
thanks for asking tho’
Yeah, and I know my blindsides as a male and I try not to jump in on these discussions.
BTW, rereading my comment, I didn’t mean to make any false equivalencies, the lack of critical thinking on the part of supposedly skeptical misogynists bothers me way more than skeptical feminists who keep trying the same arguments and engaging in the same threads over and over. It’s like comparing losing a limb to stubbing a toe. It’s just frustrating a little to watch awesome people try to shove a reasonable square peg into an unreasonable round hole.
Is it transphobic to reject “cis” as a term because it makes every spellchecker I’ve used freak out? ._.;;;
I shudder to think what kind of person in your mind fulfills all those criteria but suffice to say that I don’t.
Sounds like a world where me crossing the road at night when a woman is walking towards me. Absolutely fucking zero change on rape, there.
Last time I checked, brownskinned people were in the lead in deaths-by-airplane-terrorism against non-brown people by a good 5000 or so. But again, that’s bigot math. Except it seems to be valid in some cases; I’m just not sufficiently on board with that yet, I guess.
= it’s all about me. Me. I. msironen, am the only sentient being in this universe whose feelings matter.
@Pteryxx
Not to my knowledge, but I could be wrong. There are plenty of trans-friendly feminist blogs and such out there, though.
@Crip Dyke
I figured as much. :)
*fist bump*
Daz:
Yeah, he was a real charmer. Married, with a daughter, too. He refused to let go of the whole Russian Roulette analogy, no matter how many times it was explained to him. Didn’t matter who explained. Just kept on blithely telling us we had nothing to worry about! Really, really! I think he came close to breaking Audley’s brain as she’s the one who engaged him the most.
Caine:
Oh fuck me, I had forgotten all about that asshole.
Caine’s not kidding or exaggerating, Daz– that’s pretty much exactly how Chassoto framed his entire argument, with a healthy dose of “you’re just being paranoid! It’s unhealthy!” thrown in.
I lost a lot of sleep because of that thread.
@Crip Dyke
Don’t forget the policing of trans women by medicine!
After all, you can’t get your SRS paperwork approved unless you’re gender normative! If you can’t give some random d00d a boner, then you don’t deserve to become a REAL woman.
Ugh.
msironen What is your point, other than reality doesn’t fit your inane delusions>?
Audley:
Oh yeah, I had forgotten that bit. He would not shut up, either. Carried that crap on for at least two threads.
“msironen What is your point, other than reality doesn’t fit your inane delusions>?”
Err, that reality doesn’t conform to the notion of me being a rapist? Not even a 1/6 one?
Caine:
Ha! My brain did come close to breaking that time. God, Chassoto was fucking thick.
Just flaunting his inability to cope with statistics ALL over the fucking place.
You SHUDDER at the thought of the kind of person which fulfills the criteria of being nice, polite, and respectful?
Now, it’s my turn to shudder….
That’s just being nice. No one is demanding anyone to do that. But we do reserve to right to praise someone who thinks of doing that for going above and beyond the call of duty. The key here is above and beyond.
This has already been explained in detail many times.
For you to even bring it up now is pure dishonesty on your part.
Citation, please.
Even if true, though, the number would have to be at least 10 million plus in favor of the brown-skinned terrorist to be above statistical noise over the total numbers of airplane travelers in this particular world.
So go ahead. Show me the citation. 10 million plus, or shut up.
Every single spellchecker I’ve ever used has an “add to dictionary” function. Perhaps if you look hard enough, you can find it and maybe, if you’re really lucky, you can even figure out how to use it.
Or to put it more bluntly, yes, it is transphobic to reject “cis.”
Sincerely, cis-hetro-male ‘Tis Himself
@taiki: IMHO, it’s meta-communication. Shooting down the actual arguments helps convince any readers who are willing to consider evidence, and also provides good practice for recognizing the same old arguments and lies in other venues. But the meta-level is simply refusing to back down and be silenced. It’ll probably take months or years to work on any individual.
@Crip Dyke, thank you for the glimpse.
Friendly… wins the thread. ♥♥♥
Caie & Audley Thing is, the Russian Roulette analogy actually works; with the obvious corollaries that playing it is a damn stupid thing to do, and that if you have to play it, you do your best to improve the odds. Which is the whole point of Schröedinger’s Rapist.
msironen Still waitin’ on an answer to my question, old chap.
We’re not. Next question?
@ esteleth – 167
and a *terrorist* fist bump to you!
- 170
sigh.
I don’t forget. I can’t forget.
sigh.
Listen, idiot, for the last fucking time:
No one is saying that you are. Not even a little bit. What we’re saying is that we don’t know.
For shit’s sake, is your fucking ego really that fucking fragile?
AANNDD, you DON’T fulfill the criteria of being normal, nice, polite, and respectful?
Well, it’s nice that you admit some degree of self-awareness.
You’re flattering yourself.
You’re not that good at faking it.
But you know who was?
My ex.
Really, really, amazingly good at faking it.
Gloriously good at faking it.
Don’t go telling me about definitions.
How can someone identify you, or any other male, with 100% certainty of not being a potential rapist. Put up, or shut the fuck up. That is our point. Whether you like it or not, unless you can provide that certainty, you are a potential rapist.
msironen #173
How do we know that, asshole? Because you say so? I know that lots of rapists have claimed not to be rapists. Considering your hatred of women, I wouldn’t put money on you not being a rapist.
Daz:
Yep, it works quite well, but Chassoto had twisted it around– I’m digging around for some quotes now.
for Caine @ 80 (I think) –
yes. Yes SR says that “all men are rapists” in exactly the same way that in the thought experiment Schroedinger’s cat is always dead when you lift the box’s lid.
Isn’t that the point of Schroedinger’s Cat?
Boys – y’know, I think it’s that they just don’t have the right kind of brain for science, poor dears, though I’m sure a few might qualify for a physics degree if we tutor them right.
Now mind you, I could be a complete sociopath. But what does your rational sense say?
My rational sense tells me you are a faceless git, posting on the internet.
IOW, it tells me nothing.
for all I know, you’re a serial killer.
Audley
Do I want to read the quotationss at 4:00 AM? Just the bare description Caine gave made me shudder.
John, thank you for the welcome!
Caine, I’m surprised you recognize me since I mostly lurk, but thanks!
I think Friendly just won the thread.
Upon further consideration of my post #187, there probably is a good chance that msironen isn’t a rapist. I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt and concede he might not be one. But if it turns out he is one, I won’t be in the least bit surprised.
Daz:
A ha! Found it!
Carlie
Chassoto’s response:
All I can say is, maybe he didn’t understand Russian Roulette?
If only. But thanks for the compliment! :-)
That’s not clear to me at all. In what single “way” are progressives engaging on the Net? How is that way “not working”? If you feel that not enough people are being persuaded by the Progressive Approach(TM), what approach would be better, and do you have evidence to support your claim?
I don’t see any “progressives” shouting so far. But I would like to request that you explain your position a little better.
Audley
Again, ugh! Sometimes, words just fail me.
You must’ve missed the part where I said it was “bigot math” and wasn’t “sufficiently” convinced it was valid.
Again:
You quote some rape statistic at me. Am I supposed to
a) bear some gender-wide guilt,
b) ask so what, since I have not committed any such crime?
Since the answer is obviously a), I can simply ask, wtf?
Daz:
Sorry, I didn’t see your protests @ #191 until after I posted. :-/
Anyway, yeah. Chassoto was one of the extra-special dumbasses.
When this thread comes around again, for the same reasons, let’s talk.
Seriously. We’re not winning shit. It pisses me off that people who supposedly are looking after my best interests simply aren’t. I can’t even have a discussion about why maybe making rude comments about women, GLBT folk, or minorities might be just stupid or rude to women, GLBT folk or minorities with out someone accusing me of being a Shakesville style radical feminist and taking everything I say way out of scope.
The discussion is being polluted and poisoned before it even starts now. This shit isn’t working. Yes, part of it is tone, part of it is recognizing the people you’re trying to have a discussion with just aren’t getting it the way you’re describing it.
The reality is any man could be a rapist. Now, there is no way to tell whether or not you are a rapist so we do risk mitigation. Why do we do that? Because if anything does happen, we will be treated with disbelief and hate, we will get told over and over by almost everyone from the cops to friends/family that “You should have known better! Why were you [insert harmless action]? How naive are you?”. This scenario happens A LOT. It has happened to me. I has happened to women I know. It has happened to others in this thread. Like that case where the rapist went free because the woman had the audacity to wear skinny jeans.
SR was written to help people understand how some of your actions could look to a woman. I wish more people understood it so I wouldn’t get dirty looks when I’m cautious or get creeped out by strangers touching me, or moving in close for no reason.
You know, it’s sad. Brick walls really do have perfectly legitimate uses.
I question your definition of “we.”
Taiki:
Actually, if you bothered to read the comments in this thread (not to mention all the others), you would know that what we do does work.
No, it’s not a miracle and huge swaths of people don’t all see the light at once. It doesn’t work that way, it never has. See my post upthread at #26 for one example. In the thread where that person was eventually enlightened, it felt, once again like we were all slamming our heads into the proverbial wall. However, a dyed-in-the-wool MRA rape apologist did become enlightened and now makes a difference when it comes to sexism.
For every single thread on these issues, we hear from people who have changed their minds, have come to understand privilege, have come to understand how they were part of the problem.
Consciousness raising isn’t easy and it’s hard work. You declaring you’re tired and really, just give up because it’s not working isn’t helping and you’ve now become part of the problem. That’s why you aren’t hearing what you want to hear. Instead of being concerned about being shouted down, perhaps you should listen to the women who not only continue to be activists but get to live with slurs, harassment, bigotry and the possibility of assault every day of our lives.
And? I’m female, over 50, bisexual, mixed race, childfree and atheist. So fucking what? We all have our little lists of what we are and aren’t. None of it is an excuse to sigh and moan. Things don’t change that way.
No, you aren’t sorry. You’re upset no one is patting you on the back and telling you that you have every right to a pity party. The one sure way to guarantee failure is to give up in favour of moaning and whining about how it just isn’t working well enough or fast enough for you, and everyone else had better fucking agree with you, or else you’ll, you’ll…whine more!
The good things in your life, you owe a great deal for many of them to feminists who have been fighting for decades on end and to those feminists now who refuse to give up, who refuse to stop, no matter how fucking tired of it all because we know it’s the right thing, the only thing to do.
As I said, if you wish to sigh in surrender, go right ahead. Stop whining about it to us.
Google “Tone argument.”
Why is it cool for Phil Plait to invoke that amongst skeptics and atheists but the second that you tell that to anyone else it’s suddenly like you’re trying to silence them?
I mean, I once saw a pair of threads on ontd_political on livejournal where one thread was the attempted refutation of the tone argument and the *very next* thread was the invocation of the tone argument on atheism.
Audley
No worries. I have a quick trigger response to things involving breach of trust/abuse of power, like rape, child battery and such, is all.
@msironen
I think the point is for you to realize why some (read many) women are afraid of rape and why they don’t automatically trust strange and unfamiliar men they are alone with.
Where has anyone asked you to bear any guilt? Links and quotes please.
How many times can I say this? We’re just asking you to be aware. We’re asking you not to act like a threat or act creepily. We’re asking you to fucking listen and try to empathize.
Have you come up with any real arguments yet?
I’m meeeeltiing, MEELTIING, NO WAIT, Reductio ad absurdum to the rescue!
You’re a potential massmurderer, pedophile and a WHORE. PROVE ME THAT YOU’RE NOT. UNTIL SUCH PROOF, I’M GOING TO CALL YOU A (potential) MASSMURDERER, PEDOPHILE AND A WHORE. AND THIS IS IN NO WAY MEANT TO DENIGRATE YOU, MIND YOU.
No one bears any “gender-wide guilt.” There is no such thing.
But we men do have “gender-wide responsibility” to be thoughtful, considerate, and aware of how women might perceive our words and actions.
Is that so horrible a prospect? Does the thought of asking every man to be thoughtful, considerate, and aware fill you with dread?? If so, why???
You know what’s funny?
I’m playing The Sims simultaneously to reading this thread, and the toddler (trapped in his crib), just screamed something that sounded uncannily like, “MOMMY! STOP SCREWING DADDY AND LET ME OUT!” As it happens, the toddler’s parents are in fact “woohooing.”
You know what’s not funny?
That yet another fucking argument that we’re being mean and not accomplishing anything is showing up.
Jesus, stop with the shouties. It’s not helping your argument, msironen.
msironen
Still waiting on an answer to my question @ 154.
No. No, the point is not a guilt trip. The point is to illustrate just how scarily common rape and assault are, and to illuminate why women take precautions. The point is to get you to understand why women do not automatically trust you just because you claim to not be a rapist. Lots of men ARE rapists. You say you’re not one and I sure as hell hope you’re not. But don’t be surprised, hurt, or offended if women don’t immediately trust you enough to go home with you.
Again, the point isn’t You Should Feel Guilty For Being Male. That’s totally a straw feminist, and nobody actually says that. The point is You Are Not Entitled To Anyone’s Trust. This shouldn’t even be a point of contention.
Get it now?
By the way, is this the part of feminism that you disagree with? Because if so, saying that you disagree is disingenuous when it’s clear that you don’t understand it. I mean, I don’t understand particle physics, but I’d never say that I disagree with it.
“SR was written to help people understand how some of your actions could look to a woman. ”
If one thing is obvious, it’s that SR wasn’t written for rapists. In fact it is a blatant attempt at guilt-tripping non-rapist men, just in case we don’t know our blame (and place).
Taiki, clearly you’re new here? Please go away and read until you know what you’re fucking talking about.
Oh? Really? But five seconds ago you were kvetching that it said all men were rapists.
Neither can anyone else. Ever. That’s what it means for an othered group to be silenced by the majority.
Go look at Rebecca Watson’s blasphemy day video. It’s got some nice quotes from Robert Ingersoll on oppression of minority views.
Yep, this bit of idiocy by you, in a vain attempt to deflect us from noticing your lack of the required proof, also shows you are tacitly acknowledging the problem. You might not like being a potential rapist in the eyes of the woman on the street, but you are. Here’s why I’m honest and you aren’t. I willfully acknowledge I can’t prove to a casual observer I’m a potential mass murderer. But you aren’t honest enough to acknowledge the same regarding rape. Why is that fuckwit???
All women do is nag, amiright guys?
[meta]
I recall when Friendly was indistinguishable from a tone troll; cogency, perseverance and substance changed that.
(Now a valued contributor; amazing what honesty and engagement can achieve, here)
If, by ‘guilt-tripping’ you mean ‘asking them to consider what thoughts might go through a woman’s head in given situations, and work to avoid distressing her as far as possible’, then yes.
Thread Bankrupt from 440 or so, but before I go back and read the rest, my hearty thanks to Caine, Nerd, Classical Cipher, SC, and all the rest who’ve fought and spit (yet again) against the clueless, selfish, disgusting MRAs.
And all y’all tone trolls (I’m looking at you, DaveR)? What in the world do you want to shut your flakin’ pieholes for one damned second and spend some time pondering the real enemies instead of the allies who make your faint heart flutter with their gauche language?
(Pssst- go fuck yourselves, sweethearts).
Taiki:
We don’t need to, we’re more than familiar with Tone Trolls™ here. Again, read the damn comments, all of them, from the beginning on this thread.
Who in the fuck here at Pharyngula has said that Plait’s DBAD argument was cool? There were multiple posts and threads about that whole issue here and the commentariat here aren’t too keen on accommodationists.
You seem to be arguing about all manner of sites and how things are handled there, rather than saying anything pertinent about what goes on here at Pharyngula.
Try to pull that muddle in your head into something coherent, would you?
Too true, msironen. Women talking to other people about how they do risk assessment is clearly nothing more than an attempt to make you feel bad. They should really just shut up. That’s also why I talk about being raped. Because I want to make you feel bad. It was really rude of me to, you know, have those horrendous experiences and not have the decency to shut up and be quiet about it. Everyone is persecuting you by having experiences and talking about them. You poor thing.
Daz:
Oh, sorry.
Associate with men I had good reason to assume were not rapists? And just in case yell “RAPIST”, since there’s a 1/6 chance I’ll be right?
Obviously, the latter part is facile. But that’s the general line of reasoning here, with the rather tragic fallacy that since 1/n women are raped, 1/n men are rapists.
Wait. How’s that again?
So…you’re crossing a street, and there being a 1:6 chance of the approaching car being a drunk driver, is the same as the approaching car driver rolling a die and attempting to run you over on a 6?
Josh:
Hallo Darlin’! Missed you. Stick this page for a while, Josh – we seem to have acquired a new tone troll, Taiki, who can’t quite seem to tell us what the problem is outside of the fact that we aren’t effective at all.
msironen @ #214
SR was written to explain men how things look from a woman’s perspective. If you read SR and get the message that you should be ashamed of having a penis, because it means you’ll rape someone, then you’re a Prime-quality, Top Rate Knucklehead.
Hint: The message anyone with basic reading comprehension skills get from SR is that women can’t know if a stranger can be a risk, and the odds for it are significant enough that ignoring the probability of harm is an unacceptable risk (unlike your knucklehead-worthy comments earlier regarding brown people and airplanes.)
Let me say that again:
-SR says “guys, rape is an ever-present concern for many women because rape is a significant problem in society”
-SR does not say “guys, women think you’re gonna rape them, so don’t whine when you get maced”
Oo! Like what? What sorts of reasons? Like, maybe, knowing someone for two years, being extremely emotionally close with them, watching them be decent to other people, being in all sorts of vulnerable situations with them without them harming you in any way?
So, mswhateverthefuck, any links &/or quotes to anyone saying all men are rapists?
Just saying I don’t check every single box on the privilege worksheet. I’m coming to you from a point of view that’s had to deal with arguing someone else who’s had a long held preconceived notion of what I was even talking about in the first place.
Because, dear dimwit, that is TRIVIALLY true. Where you and your ilk go astray is trying to attach meaning to this triviality and with it bludgeon your target into submission.
Also, do you lock your house at night, even though the potential for it being broken into is actually pretty low?
My inability to assess with certainty whether any given man will become the third to rape me: a triviality.
How do you prove to the woman, with a casual glance by her, with 100% certainty, that your aren’t a rapist, or any other man they meet isn’t the rapist. Don’t avoid the question, which is what you are doing. Face it and recognize what it means. You may not like the answer, and I don’t give a flying fuck about that. But you really need to answer the question without paranoia or distaste of the answer on your part.
Yeah, because people don’t have their emotions twisted one way or the other because of the tone of a discussion. Perfectly reasonable to just say that tone trolls are morons and never actually care about how you come off on the internet.
msironen
Have you not read this thread at all? Most rapes are, in fact, committed by people known to, and trusted by, the victim. Millions of women would really like to know how you, in your infinite wisdom, can tell the fucking difference between a rapist and a non-rapist.
Again I ask; given that you probably aren’t infinitely wise, what measures of risk assessment and avoidance would you take to lengthen those one-in-six odds?
[OT]
taiki:
1. Meh.
2. Meh.
3. Meh.
4. You’re religious? You have my sympathy.
(But you can overcome that, with a bit of intellectual honesty and existential bravery. I encourage you to do so)
Not that MRA-ronen’s interested in actual facts or statistics, but about 10% of men admit to being rapists on anonymous questionnaires.
I keep this comment around for easy pasting, since I need it so often.
Dr. Whateverfuck,
http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/m/marilynfre108276.html
Also, yes I do. I also yell “YOU FUCKING SUBHUMAN WASTE OF AIR BURGLAR” at every neighbour I happen to run into the staircase.
So even though you have been told the probability of a woman being raped by people they know and trust, you still want to pull this out of your ass?
Your suggestion here implies that women should not go out at night, or to bars/clubs, jobs, public transportation or in fact outside at all because they don’t know all those strange men and its just stupid to be around men you don’t know, right? And hey, if you do get raped, it was either your own fault for being around strange men or its just your bad luck with the stats.
Or you could live in reality and fight against rape culture, rape apologists and such while women do risk assessment. Just like a certain essay…..
taiki
If you don’t like the tone taken on a particular message board, may I humbly suggest that you choose one out of the millions available that you do like?
John:
Yep and Friendly deserves much credit for stopping to listen and think.
msironen:
You have no way of knowing if any stranger is a mass murderer, a pedophile or a prostitute until you are in a position where you find that out. You cannot tell by looking at someone if they are a murderer (mass or not) or a pedophile. As for someone being a prostitute*, you can often tell by looking, so I’m not sure why that’s in there.
That’s the point, dipshit. You can’t tell by looking, that’s why people take reasonable precautions. Duh.
*Why, exactly, did you need to pop off with the whole whore business? The majority of prostitutes, female and male are more likely to be harmed than harm. Just couldn’t handle another moment without yelling “whores!” to a bunch of feminists?
Where, dumbass?
This thread and many threads before it just amassed into a single entity, lurched morosely forward, sprouted wings, and flew right over your fucking head.
Your mistake, again. It’s not about guilt-tripping: it’s an attempt to enlighten oblivious males like yourself that your intent is not magically obvious to other people you meet. The disinclination of people like you to voluntarily curb aspects of male behaviour that creep other people out, and call out that behaviour when you see it in other men, has the effect of giving “cover” to the real predators.
Similarly, a question to psychoticatheist: are you proud for having clogged the thread with your blather at tedious length, and helping to “give cover” to the misogynists?
[OT]
taiki:
Heh. I don’t need to Google it, I’ve followed that issue in real time. Were you familiar with Pharyngula, you’d know what its consensus about Phil’s tone argument was. ;)
(Feel free to cite or quote where anyone here has intimated that’s cool)
Jesus Christ. You are really dense.
I was talking about us, dumbass. An argument that was made here.
But congratulations, I guess. After a couple of hundred comments or so, you finally managed to pull something out of your ass.
Yes, because being emotionally involved in an important issue like this is wrong.
Yes, because this is Pharyngula, where the history shows we all love accommodation and politeness.
If you haven’t noticed, people have their own fucking styles and are free to be as nice or mean as they want. And those whose tone you don’t like, couldn’t give a fuck less about how we come off to people like you.
Don’t like it? Leave there are plenty of other places on the world wide net where you will feel welcome.
Oh, please.
Well, it might’ve been just some kind of attempt at achieving parity with the “rapist”-charges, but it was probably just me not being able to keep a lid on my raging… misogyny. You probably had me there.
Tell you what, MRA-ronen, you go right ahead and have “I AM NOT A RAPIST” tattooed on your forehead. Because that’ll totally solve the problem. Er, the problem of your hurt feelings, that is. It won’t solve the problem of actual rape, but that was never your point, now was it.
Good try. I really like that you stopped spewing idiocies. “Oh please” is way better. But try real arguments next time.
msironen:
Wow, you’re a real doofus.
Again: The wicked flee when no man pursueth.
–
(Then again, I’m righteous, so I don’t have a guilt-trip over this. I merely acknowledge reality.
Perhaps, one day, you too can achieve my exalted status!)
Oh thank you Caine, I couldn’t figure out how to comment on that. It is just so far fucking wrong. >.<
I actually have a 100% efficient method of reducing the amount of rapes by me. My trick is to not commit then.
Alright everyone, I’m tired.
I’d help out more with dealing with the troll, but unfortunately I’m exhausted and trolled-out.
I’ll be back in the morning!
Oh please. I know what a tone argument is. My first comments on this blog were a tone argument and it got shot down verrrry quickly.
If you’re declaring that progressive engagement on the Internet is failing because we’re being rude, crude, and mean, I have news for you. Being nice fails much harder. It seems to me that the reactionaries cleaned liberalism’s clock on the Net for years because the right wing were being as nasty and hideous as possible, spewing hate and misinformation 24/7, and while a lot of the left wing tried to be “respectful and conciliatory”, lots of moderates concluded our team was weak and ineffectual and joined the Dark Side. Thank goodness that those days seem to be passing!
I’m willing to play nice with right-wingers who are also willing to play nice, and engage in real discussion involving real ideas and real data. But when that group — or anyone else — just pukes all over a thread, leaving comments with insincere arguments that have been rebutted many times before, leveling unfounded accusations, shooting flamethrowers of fear and jaundice and smarm everywhere…nope, I’m not willing to put on the white gloves and host a garden party.
You’ve stated that progressives are “engaging with people with the same tactics over and over again.” I think that’s pretty rich. Who is it, by and large, who’s more prone to barge into Internet threads with “the same tactics over and over again” — no reason, no evidence, no actual willingness to debate honestly or change their positions, just loads and loads of superheated bile? A hint: It ain’t the progressives.
I’m waiting for an answer to my question, kiddo. What “good reasons” do you have to assume a man isn’t a rapist? Did mine sound good to you?
Taiki:
Stop being such an idiot, will you? You are not responding to anything people are actually saying, you’re simply repeating the same whine over and over. That’s a problem with tone trolls. One we keep finding ourselves having to explain.
It’s not a matter of “tone trolls are morons.” It’s a matter of us explaining, over and over and over and over and over that if your personal style is one that is quiet or accommodating or polite or whatever, then go ahead and use it! No one here cares about that at all. One more time, if you had bothered to read the fucking comments in this thread, you would know that.
Desert Son posted in this thread and I used him as an example to a tone troll, one Dave R. Desert Son is consistently polite, thoughtful and educational in his posts. That’s his way and he is not only highly respected, but he was noisily and happily nominated for a Molly and received one. Another commenter here, Sastra, is known for her patience and polite tone. She is also highly respected and another person who received a Molly.
They approach things their own way. Not one single time have the commentariat here scolded them or told them their tone is wrong. You know why? Because they simply use the approach they wish to use and do not tell the rest of us that we should be like them, they do not tell us we’re mean, they do not tell us we shouldn’t cuss so much, etc.
What you’re doing is the standard tone troll tactic – rather than addressing the topic at hand in a manner you find to be good, you’re insisting on telling us that what we’re doing is wrong and we should change. You’re offering us shit on a plate and getting upset because we aren’t eating it.
You want to be all sweetness, light and nice? Go for it. (Oh, that’s right, you can’t, because it isn’t doing any good. Darn.) So, what you’re settling for is telling us how we should behave.
Now I haven’t told you to fuck off just yet, but fair warning, I’m getting close.
Great. Now all you need to do is figure out how to convey to women who might meet you in confined spaces, dark streets etc that you’ve made that commitment. Hint: shouting ‘It’s okay, I’m not a rapist’ isn’t going to work.
You didn’t answer the question cupcake. Why was that? You didn’t like the answer, and are a dishonest fuckwit?
Unless you can answer the question on the table honestly, and act on the honest answer, you are misogynist.
So, how does anyone, not just a woman, tell with a casual glance you aren’t a potential rapist?
Cupcake, you know, but can’t accept the honest answer, which is they can’t. You must take that into account in your behavior. Not doing that makes you a misogynist.
msironen
No. You have it backwards.
Every time a woman meets a new man she rolls a d10*. She does not see the result of the roll. On a 10 the man is both capable and willing to rape. She will find out who has the 10 and whether he has ill intentions toward her if/when she lets her guard down and he rapes her. She may know and trust him for many years before he does this.
Quit being a self centered scumbag for a minute and consider what you would do in that situation. Its the game women play with all their male interactions.
*using the stats from Esteleth @ 159
Amphigory
YES. That is an excellent analogy. Very well done.
Now, msironen and you other blockheads out there, add in the relative results of mis-judging the situation (getting your wallet stolen or getting raped and possibly murdered). NOW can you see what we are talking about?
whore and rapist are NOT the same. Not even in the same sphere.
You know, I don’t… I don’t think I’ll ever get it. I’m just going to avoid these threads from here on.
I just don’t understand where feminism and liberalism is going anymore.
I really REALLY boggle my mind at misogyny and yeah, it fills me with some angst and ennui. Sorry for using a very violent potentially triggering imagery, but, yeah. Reading that “Rebeccunt Twatson” is somehow an appropriate nickname for anyone kind of reminds me of what a Dementor’s Kiss is described as.
Men rape.
Women rape at a much lower frequency but they also do.
Dolphins rape too, quite regularly, but normally just their own kind.
Conclusion: avoid men, women and dolphins, especially if you are a female dolphin yourself. Everybody could be a rapist, murderer, serial killer or libertarian. Solipsism for the win!
And exactly how, is everyone you meet in the real world supposed to know this? What behaviours do you perform to put people at ease? What actions do you refrain from to avoid creeping others out?
I know this hard for you, but please try to put some thought into your answers.
Many of us feel much the same way about it. You’re doing wrong by blaming the people who are trying to push back against it, and you’re doing wrong by telling us that we should all give up because you have.
Sorry, it’s nearing 7am here and I really gotta get some sleep also. But I’m gonna leave you all with this to mull over:
Again, PZ assumes he (and his faction) is in some kind of position to “discommunicate” undesirables from the “flock” and the commentary here strongly echoes the sentiment. This is both sad and amusing on many fronts, but I expect it will be lost on most of the readers here.
Dismissing something as ‘trivially true’ is orthogonal to assessing its potential for actually happening.
It is ‘trivially’ true that I can’t prove I’m not going to murder everyone dear to you.
It is ‘trivially’ true that I can’t prove I’m going to eat lunch tomorrow.
Yet the chances of me murdering everyone dear to you, and the chances of me eating lunch tomorrow, are likely not the same.
Follow-up: Where do you think rapists lie on between those two points?
Toiletman,
I’d be quite happy for you to avoid men, women, and dolphins. Perhaps you might want to step away from the Internet connection as well; the adults are talking.
Pteryxx:
There’s also Predator Redux, which is well worth reading (if one isn’t braindead or reading-phobic, that is.)
Here’s a bit:
Translation: I don’t have shit, so I’m going to make a clumsy segue and pretend no one noticed.
misronen, please stick the flounce.
Also, I meant to add, I hate the word whore. Seriously, its just fucking dumb that women get labeled for having sex. Or when its actually applied to sex workers and their situation is just so horrendous. Insult to injury indeed.
Rapist = actually title of those that force themselves sexually upon others.
Whore = term used to shame women, for either being a victim in a sex industry or for being in control of her sexuality and doing it her way.
Also, if you really wanted to be accurate in your misogyny, you’d call us bitches since we are having sex, just not with you.
An apt analogy, but I deny that “Rebeccunt Twatson” is an appropriate nickname for anyone, and I submit that anyone who calls Rebecca Watson by such a name is neither feminist nor liberal.
Philip Legge:
Just ignore it, please. Responding does nothing except to further xis goal of derailing threads. Thanks.
Jeebus, it’s gone 5 am here. I, too, must wend my weary way to, erm, a synonym for ‘bed’ starting with ‘w’.
G’night all.
As an afterthought to my 248:
I bet you can find quotes to support any position on this crazy thing called the internet. Kicking puppies? Chad Ochocinco has got your back!
Let’s try on something a little more controversial, huh? How about “women are whores”:
From the charmingly titled blog Men Are Better Than Women.
My point is that you really can find any position supported by someone, but that doesn’t mean that it is germane to the conversation at hand. Simply because you’ve found one quote from a woman has said that “all men are rapists”, doesn’t mean that all (or any) of us agree. Although, if you can show me where one of us has supported this position, I’m all ears (er, eyes).
Just_A_Lurker, I’d like to point out that there are many male prostitutes. It’s wrong to view prostitution or sex workers as female only.
The fact that you yourself give some rudimentary probabilities for each class right above this shit-for-brains conclusion – wherein you ignore those very same probabilities – seems to have escaped you.
Audley, there’s also the ever so charming latest from that cockroach Vox Day (which was brought up on the first page of this thread:
I’ll have to ask Mister if he’s sorry he didn’t slap me to express his attraction to me.
Too true. I should have mentioned that. My apologies.
Oh yeah sorry about that guess I did that too
Caine:
Ugh.
I’m guessing that Vox Day doesn’t know the definition of “established”, “empirical”, or “fact”.
That’s because you don’t want to understand. You’ve been told, several times, that you can be as nice and polite as you want. What you can’t do is tell everyone else to be nice and polite. Is this too difficult to grasp?
Rapists HURT PEOPLE. Whores do not.
Wow! MRAronen finally said something that wasn’t a lie. I really am shocked. Yes, MRAronen, asserting–even in jest–that rapists are on par with sex workers is pretty much a textbook example of misogyny in action.
Thanks for finally being honest and admitting that you do, in fact, hate women, as a class.
If you read the quote from “Meet the Predators” above, you’d know that hostile attitudes towards women are an indicator that this is a guy with a higher than average probability of being an ACTUAL (not potential) rapist.
So if you really want people to believe you when you say you’re not a rapist, one thing that would make it more convincing is if you’d drop the misogyny.
Translation: It’s a fucked up opinion that Pox Day pulled out of his large intestine.
[meta]
msironen:
The bleeding obvious intimidates you so much that you cry for mercy when confronted by it?
(That it’s beyond your competence to grasp (never mind contend against) the proposition and so resort to blustering evasion, thus evincing your cowardice and impotence, is rather amusing.
Please come back, O chew-toy)
Oh, MAN the projection the is strong in this one.
How else can one go from “sad” to “Rah Rah let’s kick’em ALL out, Rah Rah!”
Well then, all you have to do is COMMUNICATE THIS via your conduct and behavior, and Schrodinger’s Rapist will never be your problem.
You see, Schrodinger’s Rapist applies the most to first encounters with unknown men. A man need only act in such a way as to assure the woman that he will never, ever, under any circumstances, ever rape her, that she will always be safe with him, and the whole issue goes away.
And it IS act, not say. Actions speak louder than words here. Much louder.
@msironen –
wanted (presumably gender) equality so you chose “whore” for parity with “rapist”?
Well, first it’s true that these behaviors are both pangender, but are biased by social forces in such a way that a large majority of each belong to only one gender, and the genders in question are not the same gender.
But that’s not all you need for gender parity. A rapist disregards your autonomy and uses power to take away your capacity to choose for yourself whether or not you wish to have sex. The consequences of such non-consensual sex are many. Though each rape is idiosyncratic, as is each victim’s response to that rape, it is not at all uncommon for serious psychological trauma, social disfunction & sexual disfunction to result. Though you have no control over whether or not condoms are used, you can also never be sure that a rapist does not have an std. Thus there is a risk of STDs that is fully outside of your control.
A “whore” respects your autonomy, generally submitting to the frequently-greater power of the customer. A whore accepts money willingly offered, and, in exchange for minimal conditions such as the use of condoms, accepts the authority of the customer to rule choice of activity within broad limits or boundaries. The consequences of patronizing a whore is that money you voluntarily choose to give away is given away and, if you refuse the reasonable request of a given whore to permit condoms during sex, there is a risk of STDs, however this is fully under the control of the customer.
So, do those behaviors look the same? Is that parity? Fear that someone will actually fulfill your express desires? Fear that if the price is something you aren’t willing to pay you get to keep your money until you decide that someone does have a fee scale in line with your desire to pay? Fear that you have complete control over the sexual interaction?
Really, what’s the big fear of whores?
As for rapists, from the outside (not being a rapist) it really doesn’t look like the rapists are offering the same deal as the whores.
But you’re the one who brought up this analogy. Please, tell us. How exactly are raping and accepting money freely offered the same?
There’s no “discommunication” here. There’s a community that’s fighting over which values define it. If it turns out that the community puts “women are people” as one of its defining values, then yes, you, MRAronen, and your ilk are “undesirables” and you’ll find yourselves less and less welcome at atheist/skeptic conferences and gathering, in publications, online, and so forth.
It’s happening on a broader scale in society. The outcome hasn’t been determined yet, but if historical trends (towards enfranchisement of marginalized groups, towards equality, and away from bigotry) hold true, then you’ll find yourself left in the dust as the rest of the world moves on. Misogyny is becoming less and less acceptable, much as has happened with racism during the past 40-50 years. It’s a dinosaur, but apparently it’s your pet dinosaur, and you love it. Well, have fun with your dinosaur but don’t try to hold the rest of us back.
I hope this idiot realizes that female dolphins DO, in fact, take precautions against male dolphins. Adult females will form pods that exclude the majority of adult males, most of the time.
Of course they cannot exclude the males ALL time since, since they need to (and want to?) breed.
Human females have much the same dilemma.
Ick – VD. His attachment to actual reality is tenuous, on his good days. And the reality he’s maintaining in his own head is a really, really disturbing place.
ms-whatisface really doesn’t understand the concept of reasonable precautions, if it has any impact on his precious feelings, does he? Odds are he’s being honest, and really is a perfectly safe, non-rapey sort. But it’s still playing the odds. I’m pretty sure my first boyfriend would be very indignant if someone decided he might be a rapist – he’s a good guy! Except that it isn’t a might. He is a rapist; he just doesn’t think he is. After all, what’s a spot of coercion and blackmail between friends, right?
I’m not too sure of the 1/6 or 1/4 statistics myself. I’ve been suspicious ever since a night in college, where a random group of women were having one of those all night talking sessions, where you start off strangers, and end up telling your darkest secrets. Six random women who happened to live on the same floor of the same dorm. Five of six had been raped or molested, and none of us was over 20 yet.
I’ve often wondered if mine realizes he is. I told him, once, after I had told him no, I didn’t want to, and begged him to stop while he did it anyway, and finally just lay quietly crying until he finished. It actually seemed to get through to him, for a second. I don’t remember exactly what happened, but he paused, then said “that was… that was rape?” Not in an incredulous way, not in a sarcastic way, in a sort of genuinely stricken way. But I dropped the issue immediately, and we no longer speak, so I’ll never know.
Dr. Audley
I’m guessing that Vox Day doesn’t know the definition of “It”, “is”, or “an”.
John:
It would seem so. It’s interesting that our chew toy brought up pedophiles, because if Schroedinger’s Rapist was slightly altered into Schroedinger’s Pedophile, I doubt the idiot would have all that much of a problem with it. Then again…
I’d say a majority of parents are concerned about pedophiles and take all the precautions they possibly can to ensure the safety of their children in that regard. I’d also say the majority of parents are cautious when encountering strangers who may be around their children because…wait for it…they can’t tell who may or may not be a pedophile!
Golly, it’s all so unreasonable!
During the Egate fallout, I related a story about an elevator and my husband. While I was in the hospital, Mister came to visit me and was waiting for an elevator. There was a man with two young children also waiting for an elevator. A car arrived and opened, Mister got in and gestured to the man with children. He shook his head and said he’d wait for the next car.
That man was taking precautions on behalf of his young children. Was he acting unreasonably? No. Was he wrong? No. He was simply taking what he felt to be the safe course of action. Shroedinger’s Pedophile in action.
Of course, that same guy was the bullying sociopath who called me a crazy bitch every time we had a disagreement, lied continuously throughout our relationship, attacked me physically, cheated on me, and just generally treated me like shit. So… probably not? Maybe it just doesn’t matter to him?
Classical Cipher:
As he raped you, in spite of the fact that he was supposedly someone who cared about you, in spite of the fact that he dismissed your pleas for him to stop, in spite of the fact that he had the opportunity to realize what he was about to do and did it anyway, yeah, I’d say it didn’t matter to him.
Heck, I used to think I’d never been raped, up until quite recently. It wouldn’t surprise me at all to find my rapist still thinks (or at least says) the same.
You know, I think I finally figured out why I get so frustrated with people like msironen. It’s because I am assuming good faith, that if we just explain it enough ways, he’ll get it. I mean it would be so much easier to killfile him and move on. Yet we all keep trying to get him to see. At this point, though, it’s pretty clear he won’t. He’s enjoying his view of “those whores all want to castrate me” too much. He’s getting off on it. Unless he is very, VERY young, and can mature a little at some future date, he is doomed to failure after failure in relationships with women because he can’t even hear them.
And yet we also know that engaging him has its uses. Much of the less virulent misogyny is the result of a lack of self-examination, not real ill will, and beating ourselves against concrete walls like msironen actually helps the education process.
So to Caine, Janine, Cryp Dyke, Nigel the bold, Audrey, Friendly, ‘Tis, Sally, and several others, thank you. I love you. I really do. I don’t have either your wit or your stamina, but I will add my $0.02 worth when I can.
But the old lady needs to get up early so I have to go. See you in the morning.
QF Fucking T.
Rapist know society will first look to blame the victim. Rapists know we’ll try to make holes in their story, that we’ll ask how much they were drinking why did they go out with him or her, that we’ll put every tiny aspect of their life under a microscope because, no matter what we claim as a group, we still don’t see those few minutes (hours, days, weeks, months and years for the people who have to live with it) of violation as a big deal.
We’re just as guilty as the rapist of silencing victims.
CC,
Fuck. I came *this* close to that, it ain’t funny.
–
[TMI]
With my own wife! ‘Cos I felt entitled.
‘Cos I was a horny bastard.
I stopped my assault, but assault it was.
Yeah, I am ashamed of it. I will always be ashamed.
Really. My gut churns as I write this, but I’m not gonna delete it before posting.
–
I was a bloke, I was young and full of myself, back then.
(Feeble excuse that it is.
I think, I hope she’s forgiven me, but I haven’t)
I guess you’re right. I just wonder about the word itself, the label. Would he be offended, if someone called him a rapist? Or is he okay with it, does he think of himself as one? I’d say probably not. But he was clearly okay with actually raping me.
*virtual hugs to pteryxx and Tapetum*
I had very conflicted feelings about the whole thing even at the time. Obviously I’d said no, I was very clear about the fact that I didn’t want to, I truly meant that I didn’t want to, and he’d gone ahead and “had sex with” me anyway. But see, I had had this bullshit fed to me about what “real rape” is, and who “real victims” are, and I had it in my head that I couldn’t be one. Massive cognitive dissonance. Thus the dropping the subject.
Also, I’m out of this thread.
Wow, John Morales. That took courage… thank you.
John, goodnight. I don’t know what is the right thing to say, and maybe this is all wrong, but I think it was very brave of you posting that. I think it shows a lot of strength that you’re able to see it for what it was, and that you try to face it, and even that you are ashamed of it. I’m glad you stopped. And I’m so glad you’re a better person now.
Michael Hawkins — Shut the fuck up. Like, forever. You’re a complete douche. The only laudable thing you ever did was take on a quack. You lost all those points being a dense shithead on every other issue here.
You want PZ to write letters to the local print (circulation Nobody Cares) newspaper? You lying dumbass.
DaveR (again) – yes, you are too an asshole. And a whiner. And a passive-aggressive little simperer. Piss off. I don’t care what your first language might be. Whatever it is, it starts with Prissy Affected Woundedness.
Eat me.
Hillary Rettig-
I’ve been standing here with a cigarette in one hand and a wet-nap in the other waiting to wipe your little bottom and put some ointment on it, but you keep going on. Gesture or something once you’re over the colic, ‘kay?
Oh hell, I can’t be bothered to go on; I’d rather have a sandwich. What a pitiful fucking display.
My ex, who DID do what John Morales stopped himself from doing, eventually recognized that he did something wrong.
After I broke up with him, and told him why, he wrote me letters later on saying that he felt so bad, he wished he could chop off his “precious lingam.”
But he didn’t. Oh well.
Then he went and joined the 12 Tribes Christian Cultists.
Hillary Rettig (#579)
You’re probably not still reading, but maybe someone can point you here next time you complain about the Bullies of Pharyngula. See, here’s the thing. I don’t feel included when I’m asked to be less confrontational or to avoid cussing and insults. That’s just how I am. It’s enough trouble putting my thoughts into coherent language; it’s a whole nother layer of difficulty to edit everything I say to fit someone else’s idea of propriety. Know what, though? Places like Pharyngula don’t demand that extra effort. Places like Pharyngula, people are interested in what I say, not how I say it, and that’s wonderful.
Your obsessive hand wringing over whether Pharyngula is inclusive enough for marginalized people pisses me off. As a socially-inept, argumentative woman with mental illness, Pharyngula is one of the few places I can come to kick back and feel completely included without having to smother aspects of my personality under social graces or conceal the fact of my gender. No place can cater to everyone’s comfort levels, and it’s fine if you don’t like the culture here, but for fuck’s sake, stop pretending you’re the champion of people like me when you try to scold PZ into changing the rules to suit your own personal tastes.
Alright, nothing ever gets deleted and maybe this will come back to haunt me some day, but I’ll say it, since it’s relevant to the conversation. FSM help me if this ever gets back to my family. …
*trigger warning*
I’ve been raped by two different people & sexually assaulted once. The first person to rape me, well, this isn’t going to make sense yet, but the first “person” to rape me was two people. So, I guess by three people, kinda, but it’s complex.
See, the first person to rape me was my sister. She thought that I needed to know what sex was …and also wanted to teach her best friend what sex was …so on the first weekend that my mother ever left us alone overnight, my sister organized some sex. She didn’t tell me she was going to. She didn’t really know what she was doing. She was 13 yo and in charge of a 10yo. Her best friend was also 13, and talked with her in advance about what they were going to do to me in their experiments, but her best friend was somewhat reluctant. She started off without qualms about making me strip, but participated in ordering me around. I started off with qualms, but also curiosity about what sex was & what would happen. When things got worse and their experiments were literally stripping my *flesh* and causing bleeding, she was trying to back out & my sister was forcing her on. I was raped with an object. My sister ordered her friend & me to do things she wanted done. Then she ordered me to do things to her. I literally begged her to stop, with tears in my eyes. When it was over, she threatened me to keep me silent. I’ve never really held her friend culpable (I suppose that was obvious since I started out not counter her, I still don’t know to what extent she was victim & what extent it’s fair to call her a co-perp)
1. she’s a woman
2. she works in a job considered white collar & respectable.
No one would ever think she would do something like this. Even less so if I actually gave details. And it’s much less likely to be raped by a woman than a man.
theres no way you can tell, there’s no way you can tell, there’s no way you can tell.
Hell, I didn’t know if *I* wasn’t to blame, since I started the night curious about sex.
When she had kids, I freaked. I didn’t actually say anything, but I freaked. What could I do? No one would believe me. Worse, they might decide I was somehow raped into being queer, and I’d had a hard enough struggle untangling my own feelings on that score, there was no way I could competently (at that point) explain them to others.
If I can’t trust my sister. If I can’t trust my sister with her kids (even though I think that she’s likely to be in the category of non-reoffending juveniles that commit one or a small number of sexual assaults at a formative sexual stage, soon after being assaulted, or both…though I don’t know that she was assaulted), If I can’t trust my sister with her husband (I’ve seen how she can dehumanize him & that with her history…)…
then how the f* can I trust a random stranger?
And yes, it’s also true that any given person (within reasonable age limits) is also my schroedinger’s life partner and schroedinger’s book club member, etc, etc, etc, and while yes the number of people I’ve met that haven’t raped me far outstrips the number that have, the point of SR is that there is a risk, there is a reason not to trust, and if you either a) object to the fact that I don’t give trust until it’s earned…or b) act in ways that boost the bayesian calculation that govern’s the subjective likelihood I may be raped by you, then you’re not giving some of the basic human courtesy that I deserve.
….
well, that’s done & out there forever. May no one ever bring this up with my sister….
John:
John, you’re hardly alone on this score, however, you did stop. That’s important. It took a great deal of courage for you to tell us that and I thank you. Because of your courage, there may be men reading who recognize such behaviour and attitudes in themselves and stop to think before they do something terrible.
psychoticatheist (#630)
If I’m playing an MMO, I don’t care whether the guy who PMs me to ask if I’m hot and then calls me an ugly cunt for telling him to fuck off is sincere or is trolling me. Either way, he’s using my womanhood to disrespect me. Either way, his behavior contributes to the hostile climate that drives women and feminists* away from gaming. He may not “really” be as sexist as he comes off, but my experience is the same either way; it’s not “background noise”; I’m still getting backlash for being visibly female in a traditionally male space. Furthermore, he’s sexist enough to think it’s okay to “jokingly” sexually harass me and put me down on the basis of my womanhood.
Same deal with the “obvious trolls” versus the “genuine sexists” in the atheist/skeptic communities; whether they believe what they’re saying or not, the trolls are still sexists, and the mere existence the brand of vitriol they share with the MRAs makes women and feminists feel unwelcome. When you say things like “I’m just suggesting that trolls are not entirely to be a trusted data source on the attitudes of skeptics,” what you’re also saying is, “I can’t trust women like Rebecca Watson to accurately represent what they’re dealing with.”
The points you need to grasp are that 1) doing it for the lulz doesn’t make sexism not sexist, either in absolute terms or from the POV of its targets, and 2) it’s in our best interest to confront both the “obvious trolls” and the “genuine sexists” head on and with plenty of emotion. If that’s “mission accomplished” from the POV of the trolls, so be it. It can also show everyone else that the atheist/skeptic communities have zero tolerance for misogyny. The trolls can have their petty victories because it’s a net win for us.
(#2-80)
No. While I think a few people mistook what you’re saying, your points are genuinely contentious and/or are built on bad assumptions and/or are mired in solipsism.
………
*Phrased this way because not all women are feminists and not all feminists are women.
What they said, John. That took guts, and humanity, both. *offers fistbump*
[delayed while thinking]
@CC, thanks. I don’t feel much of anything about it, because I’m still more concerned with parsing the rest of the abuse, I guess.
[TMI]
I started to figure out there was a problem with my abuser-partner hating sex when I wanted it, but demanding sex when I didn’t want it, particularly with specific practices (and the more it hurt me, the better). With the last couple years of reading on the subject… yeaaah, that definitely counts.
(Seriously, I think it’s pretty strange to refuse enthusiastic, willing blowjobs but demand unwilling ones, in the same session. WTF?)
tielserrath (#763)
Thanks for the link. I agree that it’s a myth that needs challenging, and while I never assumed people on the spectrum were not empathetic, I never explicitly rejected the idea they weren’t, either. Anyway, after reading a few pages of stories there, it seems very clear that EG being on the spectrum is the worst explanation for him doing what he did after attending a talk where RW explained her feelings in words.
Me too. With my then girlfriend now wife. Knowing her brother had actually gone through with it.
I gotta go talk to her.
Crip Dyke, I’m so sorry for your experience. I know just how difficult being raped by a family member can be, especially when you’re a child. Mine started when I was 3 years old. I experienced my first orgasm during the course of being raped (same family member) when I was 9 years old. The only way for me to cope was to walk away from my family, which I did decades ago. It’s so fucking hard when it’s your family that’s criminal. I wish you all the best dealing with this situation and all the fallout.
I’m reminded of Alison Arngrim’s book, Confessions of a Prairie Bitch, where she writes about being repeatedly raped by her brother. It was difficult for me to read, but in the end, affirming.
Crip Dyke
I would like to say something comforting
but
I have nothing.
chocolate?
You are a white individual in a high crime predominantly black neighborhood. You are walking alone, and see a young black male walking toward you (or possibly multiple). Is it reasonable to regard this individual as Schrodinger’s Mugger?
Now I’m not here to say one or the other is the correct response (as a poker player I’m apt to side with the use of probabilistic decision making myself, but that’s just me) but I do think that saying that either Schrodinger’s Rapist or Schrodinger’s Mugger is valid, but not both, is hypocritical. They are essentially the same argument.
Also, while it is true that in society whites have more privilege, in this particular scenario it does not factor, I think. Whites do not, in this scenario, have the privilege of being immune to getting mugged. And if we go along this line of thinking, I suppose fear for one’s safety against a potential threat should trump fear of being treated as a potential criminal?
I guess we can also consider the situation of white people looking scared when a brown person boards an airplane along with them. Should the brown person be offended at the white people not immediately trusting him/her not to be a terrorist?
I think the real problem here is that the SR post oversimplifies things. Most women do not spend every minute of their lives assessing risk of being in close proximity to any and all men. There’s a lot more that goes into consideration – body size, age, height, appearance and dress code, body language, and (unfortunately with most people) race – not simply gender. If two men holding hands enter an elevator, most women are not going to be fearful, though crudely applying the SR principle would suggest that they should. If I walk into an elevator holding another man’s hand and a woman in the elevator edges away looking fearful, I’m more likely to assume she’s a Michelle Bachmann and get offended.
Crip Dyke, *hugs* and/or *fistbumps* as you wish.
Sheesh, until that post, I forgot all about being given a “lesson” in sex (and cussing) by a babysitter, complete with threats if I told. I only remember it being brief and annoying, though. Also, I knew more about anatomy than she did… so I kept correcting her. (I’m SUCH a geek.)
A. Noyd:
As someone who always looks forward to your posts, I’m very happy Pharyngula is a good place for you.
Aitapyh:
No one said that. You might want to work on your reading comprehension.
No, it really doesn’t. It’s a clear cut illustration which still is not understood by many men.
You might want to try speaking for yourself. Making assumptions on this subject isn’t going to get you anywhere.
Crip Dyke, I’m so sorry. If you need to talk to us, we’re here. :(
pteryxx, yeah. I get that. Rape is most relevant to these discussions, so we focus on it in them, but long-term abuse is a whole complex mess of a thing. My rapes were traumatic and have noticeably harmed me, but the abuse – in my case, the psychological aspects were the worst – is what keeps me up at night, what paralyzes me suddenly during the most routine tasks, what makes me occasionally (not now, but during the really bad times) loathe myself and wish I had died. You know already, but I’ll say it anyway, for everyone’s benefit: the fact that people respond differently to rape doesn’t make it any less rape, and it doesn’t make them any less victims.
I do. And SR doesn’t require “every minute.” Now shut the fuck up and go away.
Re: this
I feel the need to make clear that this is in no way sensible, nor even a real wish. It’s one of those sick despairing things that crosses your mind and you look back on it later and think “gods, I was being such a dumbass.” Most of the time I’m very aware of that.
Thanks Caine, Chigau & Pteryxx –
and, by the by, chocolate is among the best possible responses.
Caine, I think I have an idea of what it might have been like to have had your first orgasm in that context. Awful.
I brought it up once w/ my sister when we were in our early 20s. She accused me of making things up AND lying (wtf?). She was really pissed, but it was hard to know if she had really forgotten that she had done that or somehow rationalized it as *not rape* and thus was honestly (though unjustly) outraged…or if she remembered what she had done and was honestly panicked at being found out as a rapist.
Either way, she refused to discuss it & it has never been mentioned again. My mother certainly doesn’t know. Nor my dad or step-dad. It’s something that would just make the family …come unglued, I guess. And being the queer and the unabashed lefty, they would certainly think I was crazy or fabricating things “for an agenda” before they would begin to entertain that I was telling the truth.
Even if everyone made a conscious decision that it was an event that must not be named, it would be so much easier if everyone already knew.
In the meantime, that’s part of my story that I don’t use in my activism. The anonymity of the internet does have its uses.
………….
as for those -john & julian- who are confessing quite opposite things… Thank you for being honest with yourselves and open with us. This is part of how we change the notion of rapists from thoroughly inhuman demons to humans ranging from fallible and oblivious to aggressively hostile, contemptuous of others, & sadistic. And changing the idea of people who did commit or might very well have committed rape is part of how we make it so that it doesn’t seem to outlandish to believe when someone steps forward to say, “I was raped.”
And, by the by, thank you for changing so that you aren’t the people you once were.
Hnh. I thought I was in this for a couple more hours, but MRAronen seems to have wandered off & I could use an emotional break, so I’m retiring …either for the night or at least til a movie & popcorn are polished off.
Again, thanks to all who made positive contributions to the thread.
Aitapyh – No, sorry, try again. You have inverted the power balance, which makes it not the same argument at all.
I’m white. You can’t tell that I’m not racist by looking at me; I might be a teabagger. You don’t know. Any random person of color doesn’t know. You know how I let people know? By not doing or saying racist shit. However, until I open my mouth and show that I try not to harbor racism, I don’t blame any random person of color for being wary that I, as a white person, might do or say something dumb.
It’s not Schrodinger’s Mugger, it’s Schrodinger’s Racist.
No answer from wife. Probably still sleeping.
I think it is but I might be biased. I grew up in a mostly Dominican and Puertorican neighborhood with a very high crime rate, was jumped several times and had my apartment broken into twice. If I see anyone coming up to me late at night in anything but a business suit I get nervous.
For me the fact that muggings are common in this neighborhood is reason enough for anyone to be on their guard. Mind you macing someone when all their doing is walking in your direction is a bit over the top. But if a group is walking up to you in a place where muggings and gang violence (adding that to your scenario) are common place, yeah I’m not gonna blame you for being nervous and maybe clutching some makeshift weapon you have in your pocket (I usually carry a knife). Personally I’d find a reason to cross the street and see if they follow.
Fuck, I’m gonna say something about the mugger b4 I go…I know, I know, I’m not sticking the …well, not “flounce” but you know what I mean.
anyway,
YES – you can’t know if that person is a mugger, so that person is schroedinger’s mugger. However, the analogy is not comparable, since the power balance is not the same. Keeping the (stereotype warning) greedy, lazy, violent, shiftless black men from taking the valuables of the upstanding, white, members of the community has long been a *focus* of law enforcement. In fact, a disproportionate focus. This is exactly the story that the system is set up to believe. Thus, one might fear being a victim, but one doesn’t need fearing being a powerless victim with no recourses and no reasonable hope of justice after the fact. Rapists are not the classic villain the system is set up to catch. Rape victims are not the classic victim the system is set up to believe.
The scenarios are the same in that you cannot tell a mugger by looking at them, but they are very different in the details of power and the hope for regaining a just balance after the fact.
If it matters to you, read my post earlier where I said that people are also Schroedinger’s (Insert lots of things here). You can’t tell if some new person will be your next dating partner, your next financial adviser, your next peanut-butter&jelly-sandwich maker.
All those things are true, but none of them are related to the question of how fear and mistrust poison interactions between people when one of them does something that shifts the bayesian calculation toward a greater risk of violence, much less the specifically gendered dynamic when that person is a man and the behavior shifts a woman’s calculation of risk of rape.
So your hypothetical scenario tells us that you’re just beginning to grasp the idea that you might not be able to judge a book by its cover, but the details of that story tell me that you still don’t understand racism, sexism, or social power and oppression.
I’m going away, so you can leave or not as you like. I leave it in the capable hands of others to tell you to f* off for being a racist if you continue, forewarned, down the path you’re taking.
Whoa.
No substance, they said.
SallyStrange, I’ve dithered a bit about asking this, and I really hope it doesn’t come off as inappropriately prying. So obviously, you know, if this is a bad question don’t feel obligated to answer it. But – were the letters a good thing, do you think? Did they make you feel better, in any way? I ask because I’ve had really conflicted reactions to similar contact – not about the rapes, but about other wrongs. I feel both like they’re trying to make themselves feel better at the cost of invading my life, and like they’re genuinely sorry and they ought to be and that’s a good thing. I’m just wondering how other people handle that.
And moreover, Schrodinger’s Racist in a small Southern town in the 1950s, to compensate for the statistics of women who have been sexually assaulted in their lifetimes (i.e. women have either been raped themselves and/or are close family members or friends of likely several other women who have been), as well as the treatment by authorites/justice system if you report an assault. Etc.
Then, on top of that, consider the physical power differential. So maybe in this hypothetical town, all the white guys always walk around with knives and guns, and all the black people are unarmed.
Are you getting it yet, Aitapyh?
@ Amphigorey
Hmm… I’m familiar with all 3 of the Shroedinger’s Rapist/Racist/Mugger scenarios… and obviously I agree that people should behave in a suspicion-avoiding manner when approaching others and take issues of privilege into consideration, however, I don’t see how the reasoning, as followed by the Shroedinger’s Racist/Rapist scenarios do not apply to the Shroedinger’s Mugger scenario. That is, if the reasoning for Rapist/Racist scenarios are valid, then why isn’t the reasoning for the Mugger scenario invalid? So I’m thinking that while the outcome of the SR scenario is correct, the particular way it is being argued is wrong.
@ julian :
I think you’re over-interpreting the analogy here. Simply, it’s about racial profiling by a person (usually white) against another (usually black).
Aitapyh,
Shut the fuck up and go away. What part of this didn’t you get the first time?
Aitapyh, you know what, Cupcake? This thread is not about you, nor is it about racism, nor is it about mugging, nor is it about twisting Shroedinger’s Rapist all around so you can derail this thread, which happens to be about rampant, toxic sexism.
Either figure out how to say something on topic* or shut up.
*And work on it being considerably better than your first effort, which was both wrong and dismissive of women. You might try reading the whole thread first, which includes the first page of comments.
No, it really didn’t. Because he wasn’t really in touch with the reality of my situation. The reality of the situation didn’t merit him chopping his dick off. He’s not the worst guy ever, just really self-centered and egotistical and too smart for his own good. But SENSITIVE! Oh so sensitive. I spent so much time soothing him and his wounded feelings and his wounded self.
Anyway, the letters just seemed really self-serving to me, a performance–I just remember rolling my eyes. So melodramatic.
—————–shifting gears—————
No, you misunderstand. The reasoning for the Mugger scenario IS valid. But you’re applying the power dynamics improperly. People are trying to tell you that when you don’t have police protection, your calculation of risks changes dramatically. And if you’ve been assaulted, it also changes. That may not be entirely rational, but it’s human. You could also say that those who have not been assaulted are so relatively rare in this society, and in most societies in the world, that they are the ones who are being irrational by not taking the risk seriously all the time, every day.
Power dynamics. Sounds all science-y and sociologimacal, doesn’t it? It’s a real thing, with measurable effects.
Rape is this one subset of crime that men commit against women and get away with it. That set of crimes used to be a lot longer. Physical assault. Stealing. False imprisonment. Compare to your scenario. Your hypothetical white guy is quite rational to take precautions, cross the street or slow down or avoid as needed, upon seeing a group of young black men across the street. Might be some racial animosity there. But your white guy knows that if he gets beat up and isn’t murdered, at least the cops have his back, will arrest these guys and try them at least, and so on. Black guy in a white neighborhood? “Oh officer we found this man attempting to accost a white lady!” The law does not have his back.
Well, I found this interesting. I hope y’all did. Peace.
And was your husband upset? Offended? Did he go crash the next parenting blog thread and whine about it ad nauseum? Did he send death and kidnapping threats to the next parent who spoke about it at a parenting convention? Did he start up his own blog thread and invite all the raving, angry, self-righteous pedophile’s rights activists to spew hate all over it for 5000 comments over three threads?
Were you upset, offended, or angry on his behalf?
I recall you told us that he didn’t mind at all. And decent people don’t. Human beings worthy of the first appellation understand.
I do not mind if a stranger takes me for a Schrodinger’s Rapist, or Racist, or Mugger. I might be upset if the continue to do so after we have already interacted and I have made my best effort to demonstrate that I am not, though in that case I will examine my efforts at so demonstrating to see if truly, I did do everything reasonable to do so, or try to see if some form of unrecognized privilege had prevented this.
Schrodinger’s Rapist is one of my litmus tests for judging the nature of people on-line by their words. Those who recognize it and accept it (when it is explained to them if they were not previously familiar with it) are people whose opinions are worth considering, people worth respecting.
Those who don’t, aren’t.
G’night all. I’ll be back in the morning if things are still going on.
Just caught this:
Amphiox:
No to all of the above.
Nope.
No, he didn’t mind at all. He understood completely. The only reason he even told me about it was because we were discussing Egate.
@Caine, Fleur du Mal/Classical Cipher, Murmur Muris, OM:
Look, I don’t see why I need to deal with people who throw unnecessary vileness at me, so I’m going to just ignore you – why don’t you do the same with me?
I’ll say this just for once regarding Elevatorgate – anyone with a modicum of social awareness knows that hitting on a woman in an elevator is pure idiocy. I’m not interested in convincing anyone of that, that should have happened when you reached 12. I’m simply interested in verifying the abstract argument in the SR scenario by applying it to potential other cases. For people who don’t wanna do that, just ignore my post and move along, just like I’m doing with all the posts that I’m not interested in. This thread is nobody’s personal property.
I also managed to find a thread on a citizen radio forum dealing with the same issue: http://citizenradio.freeforums.org/is-schrodinger-s-rapist-an-acceptable-feminist-argument-t2994.html
To this, I would add also the role that socialization plays in this. Women are taught throughout our lives in various ways that we are responsible for protecting ourselves from rape. If we are raped, we are taught that we have failed in some way. The lack of police protection backs this up – our own personal risk assessment is the only thing we can rely on here. And sickeningly, the reality of the situation is that we cannot actually protect ourselves, not totally, not enough, but we do what we can anyway. It’s not fair and it’s not right that this is the message we’re getting shoved at us at every turn, but no one bases their risk assessments on what’s fair.
Poker? LAWL. it’s 3 AM and I can’t resist.
If you’re a halfway decent poker player, then first off you’d rely on ACCURATE probabilities, and not just whether you like hearts more than diamonds or hate the number 3. Those 1-in-6 rape stats are accurate at minimum, and predatory behaviors such as aggressive flirting, groping, and harassment are more common still. Women often get harassed on a daily basis. There ain’t THAT much mugging to go around.
Second, you would also adjust your responses based on the situation, including the play styles and tells of the other players. If you can tell that a happy player’s more of a threat than a nervous one, you should be able to figure out that a stranger giving you the eye or sidling up to you in an isolated area is more of a threat than someone of any color just going about their business.
Third, you’d adjust your responses based on your risk versus reward. You wouldn’t play a lot of poker if your opponent got to decide how much of your stake you could bet and you “winning” meant only that you broke even. But that’s the risk imposed on a woman when a man approaches her – she’s at risk of harassment, assault, or rape, depending on the intentions of the man, but the best-case scenario is just that she goes about her business. Risk without reward. Conversely, predatory men can expect to get away with everything up to and including rape. Even if a victim reports the rape and provides evidence, odds are he won’t be convicted, while the woman generally gets re-traumatized and slandered. Muggings, especially by minorities, get taken a lot more seriously.
Why should women be expected to engage with men who control the stakes and hold all the cards?
The point of Schroedinger’s Rapist is very simple. If you’re a decent guy, prove it by letting the woman tap out. (Or like the song says, know when to walk away.)
But there’s no (or at least what I’d call) racial profiling in your example. It was basically there is a lot of crime here, you’re walking down the street, someone is walking up to you, you get nervous. Roles reversed it’s the exact same thing, even if you’re white and the other young man isn’t.
Now if a police officer came by and stopped that black man that’d be closer to what I call racial profiling. Not because he’s an authority figure but because he sees two people walking towards each other and assumes the black one is going to commit a crime when neither young men’s behavior suggests criminal activity.
Am I off?
Because you’re a sickening fucker who showed up to compare women to racists on the grounds that both are, in some way, assessing risk. You ought to be seriously fucking ashamed of yourself.
I don’t understand the question. What exactly is tripping you up?
Maybe the problem is you’re equating a stereotype with actual evidence and experience. Let’s compare, shall we?
1. Most women have been molested, sexually assaulted, threatened with sexual assault, or raped OR have close family members or friends who have been.
Most people have never been mugged.
2. Most perpetrators of rape (by a high, high percentage) are men.
Yes, most muggers are of disadvantaged backgrounds, often ethnic minorities–but this percentage is not nearly as high. And though minorities might predominate among muggers, there are plenty of majority ethnicity muggers too.
3. A far, far higher percentage of men are rapists than black people are muggers.
4. The only geographical location that is an indication of a potential rapist is proximity to you.
Muggers are typically located in “high crime” areas.
4. There are virtually no other external cues to indicate whether someone is a rapist.
There are plenty of cues other than skin colour (and more reliable ones to tell if someone could be a mugger (clothing, carriage, stalking behaviour, indications of drug use).
–
For all of these reasons (and probably many others I can’t think of), the two situations are not remotely equivalent even as far as the reasoning is concerned. To treat a black man as Schrodinger’s Mugger implies that all the things that *do* apply to the case of Schrodinger’s Rapist apply to him (i.e. most people have been victims of a black mugger, most muggers are black, a good percentage of black people are muggers, even black men in good clothes and non-high crime neighbourhoods have a good chance of being muggers). Since none of these things are true (except in certain locations, point two), to act like they are, is *racism*.
Caine (#2-321)
Aww, shucks. Well, I’m grateful that there are the far-more-regular regulars like you who do the hard work of keeping Pharyngula that sort of place!
Is it me, or has this thread been truncated?
Right under my comment, to the left, you should see the words “Older Comments.” There’s a second page.
Psychotic:
I’m not suggesting complete blanket ignoring of trolls, I am suggesting ignoring trolls as part of a data set when trying to understand the attitudes within the skeptic movement. If women are put off by anonymous internet assholes, this is not something the skeptic movement can really do much about. We can’t reason with trolls.
I haven’t read all the nights posts, so I can’t tell if this has been adressed (sorry for bungling if I do)
I just suddenly understand where you are coming from, and decided to hit you over the head from hopefully a more productive direction.
It seems to me that you think we are trying to establish the prevalence of sexism in Atheist/skeptic circles.
We’re not.
It might be interesting, but we haven’t the resources to do so.
Futhermore, while it might be interesting it isn’t important.
You know why? Because even a smidgeon of sexism is too fucking much.
And while some might be trolling in your view, you seem to recognise that some are not.
So why don’t you either lend a hand in purging the sexism that’s clearly there, or shut the fuck up. At the moment you are just a whiny distraction to people who are trying to make a difference. Don’t be – ok?
bah, fucked up blockquote. First part is (hopefully) recognisable as “not me” but a quote from psycoticatheist
[meta/OT]
Why is it that pathetic losers feel the need to write in all-caps when they are losing the discussion (and their wits). Are they incapable of seeing that all-caps labels them as losers?
[more meta]
Yikes! Three times in a row by myself (now quite possibly four) – scoring some PL-points myself I see.
Reading up here was hard. It was hard, but it was good.
It makes me realize that so far in my life, I’ve been lucky.
Nothing more, nothing less.
To all of you (you know who’s included in this you), you’re great, and you’re brave.
Yeah, nothing to add that wouldn’t sound shallow, so I stop here.
psychoticatheist at (new) #80
You seem to be enormously invested in the idea that the skeptic community is troll-free. Just an observation.
Here’s where I really disagree, though. You say “we shouldn’t get outraged, appalled or upset about these things.” I think we absolutely should, all of us. Frankly, any decent person should be outraged, appalled and upset about (for example) the shit Rebecca Watson is having to endure. What other response is reasonable? And your response seems to be, basically, Oh, those things don’t count—and I cannot understand how a decent human being could respond that way.
Daz at (new) #81
Nice analogy. In fact, the more I read it, the better it gets.
Friendly (new) #162
Awesome!
msironen (new) #225
But that’s the general line of reasoning here, with the rather tragic fallacy that since 1/n women are raped, 1/n men are rapists.
And I could have sworn I read somewhere upthread a cogent comment pointing out that a lot of rapists rape more than once, and that there is not, therefore, a 1:1 match of rape victim:rapist. Possibly you missed it. You do seem to be determined not to understand this stuff.
Classical Cipher, #304
I think there are a lot of men around who would reject the label of ‘rapist’ even though they have in fact raped someone—quite likely a wife or girlfriend. That survey cited upthread—I’m sure I’ve read that the word ‘rape’ is not mentioned in the questions; when men are asked if