What women (don't) want.

[eFestivals]

Why do you have to be so mocking? What does it achieve?

The other posts were mocking, that one was not.

What makes you think simple and clear questions are mocking?

There's an awful lot that's relevant to be found via those questions, too. I was kind of hoping that was the idea of this thread, to investigate ideas around the subject.

But apparently not. Consideration and discussion of evidence is always rejected by some. Strange, eh?

[feral chile]

Isn't part of the rape thing (is it down to men not doing it, or women not wanting to have it done to them) a bit of a red herring? Isn't it because culturally, we (men and women) agree that it's a bad thing? Which is part of the progress that has been made..?

I don't think those comments are meant as an excuse, I think it's part of an attempt to understand why things are the way they are.

But I agree, it does pretty much diminish womens contribution to everything. That's every flippin thing!

I'd try and avoid feeling offended though (if that's possible!). It kind of detracts from what you believe.

You're right, getting annoyed just means I'll pose the counter argument to try to prove how stupid I think the whole argument is.

And it's not what I believe. I think we have a society, fair enough, which is far from perfect, that is at least trying to work to eliminate unfairness.

This emphasis on power instead of love and trust and empathy, is something alien to me. Men have females in their lives - I don't believe they're going through life completely insensitive t the influence of the women they care about.

This is painting an abhorrent picture of society, and of men. We're living in a society where empowerment is encouraged, minorities are considered, most people have a voice.

I'm far more worried about groups who are still dismissed, particularly benefit claimants and disabled people, (some people are both, and they have the least influence of all).

People are dying because of government policy, and it's obscene that we're discussing how hard done by women are in the UK when this is happening in a supposedly civilised society.

There are far more deserving causes to be fighting for. it's the ones not being discussed who are the really disempowered ones.

Edited March 6, 2015 by feral chile

[feral chile]

The other posts were mocking, that one was not.

What makes you think simple and clear questions are mocking?

There's an awful lot that's relevant to be found via those questions, too. I was kind of hoping that was the idea of this thread, to investigate ideas around the subject.

But apparently not. Consideration and discussion of evidence is always rejected by some. Strange, eh?

I haven't seen any discussion of evidence - I tried to find some statistical evidence but couldn't.

Mind you, every time I've tried to pin anyone down t anything other than vague assertions about power I've been accused of not being able to see what's obvious. Self evident truths are dodgy as shit, and I'm surprised you're going down that route, with your faith in science.

[bunique]

Well the thread is about women, so naturally the discussion will be about women. It is possible to consider feminist issues important *as well as* the needs of disabled people and benefit claimants. Being a feminist isn't at the exclusion of anything else.

[bunique]

And I would be willing to stake a claim that more women die as a result of domestic abuse each week than benefit claimants.

[russycarps]

I agree.

Of course, by definition, if men are defined as potential rapists, and they don't rape, then they have chosen not to, because of whatever cultural and legal pressures there are.

But we're getting into a situation now where proof of patriarchy is being claimed for everything. Women valued more? Yes, because men choose to.

So even the fact that women are considered more equal in the UK than in India is still proof of patriarchy.

So now we're getting, 'you're only equal because we allow it'.

And they can't see just how outrageously misogynistic that statement is.

Imagine a white person saying that to a black person.

'The only reason you're not murdered is because us white people choose to let you live'

I'm seriously offended by comments such as these, and wonder at the mentality of the individuals who believe it.

do you really think women could achieve complete equality if men weren't onside?

[feral chile]

do you really think women could achieve complete equality if men weren't onside?

Of course not. Do you really think any disadvantaged group could achieve equality if non disadvantaged groups weren't onside?

I'm more concerned with groups who are losing their lives in the UK because nobody gives a shit.

Women as a discrete group, relatively speaking, aren't that badly off. If you're female, disabled and on benefits, you're in real difficulty.

It's just the wrong emphasis for me, that's all. I just don't think women as a group are as disempowered in the UK as people are making out.

It's a distraction from people who really do need our help, some of whom will be women, of course.

Edited March 6, 2015 by feral chile

[bunique]

Sooo...start a thread about disability rights, or benefit claimants. I don't understand your annoyance about women's rights issues in a thread about women's rights

[russycarps]

yeah I don't know wtf is going on in this thread anymore.

And I agree with bunique, I cant remember the stats but I'm sure it's well over a 100 women a year in this country are killed each year due to domestic violence.

Deaths due to poverty are no doubt higher (albeit harder to classify), but this thread has been 67 pages of discussing women, I dunno why all of a sudden we need to feel guilty for not considering other minority groups!

[feral chile]

Sooo...start a thread about disability rights, or benefit claimants. I don't understand your annoyance about women's rights issues in a thread about women's rights

I have, actually. Nobody wants to know about disabled women getting raped in their own homes by carers. Carers who can prevent those women from getting to anyone who could help them, because they have complete control over them. Or women who have been sectioned, who have their sexual history (promiscuity) included as part of their diagnosis of abnormal behaviour. Who then are incarcerated and have absolutely no power at all. No say in their own treatment or when they can be released.

Edited March 6, 2015 by feral chile

[russycarps]

is this because I pointed out that the advances in equality in this country are due more to a change in men's attitudes than anything else?

seems silly to get so riled over that.

[bunique]

I don't understand what you think is dis empowering. Rape is, by legal definition, carried out by a man on a woman. The only person who can decide to perpetrate that rape is the man. If a man decides to rape a woman, what power does she have to prevent it? Even if she fights it off, it's still attempted rape/sexual assault. You're saying women have the power to prevent rape - I've asked you how but your answer didn't really answer (it was a bit Neil-esque if you like ).

[bunique]

This discussion is making this meme run on repeat through my head:

[feral chile]

yeah I don't know wtf is going on in this thread anymore.

And I agree with bunique, I cant remember the stats but I'm sure it's well over a 100 women a year in this country are killed each year due to domestic violence.

Deaths due to poverty are no doubt higher (albeit harder to classify), but this thread has been 67 pages of discussing women, I dunno why all of a sudden we need to feel guilty for not considering other minority groups!

[/quote

because you're talking power struggles, not fairness.

If you were saying women as a group were disadvantaged, then yes, still today, I'd agree. I'm pretty sure stats would back this up.

I'm trying to point out to you that women do have a voice, not all women are powerless (though some undoubtedly are).

And I'm trying to demonstrate what genuine disempowerment is like. Believing men have more power than women is something that can be statistically considered, and steps can be taken to rectify it. As long as power isn't absolute, as long as women aren't invisible, and as long as we live in a culture that values fairness.

Believing men are more powerful than women is not the same thing. This is an absolute statement, and results in permanent disempowerment for women.

And using fear of rape as an example is appealing to the second statement. We're all powerless when confronted by violent attack. This isn't evidence that the perpetrators really control society. It's evidence that the laws are merely deterrents, and marginalised people won't be deterred if they have less to lose.

[feral chile]

is this because I pointed out that the advances in equality in this country are due more to a change in men's attitudes than anything else?

seems silly to get so riled over that.

No. I felt threatened by the veiled threat in your comment that I'm only safe in my own house or outside, because my husband, sons, male neighbours and workmates etc. have chosen they don't want to rape me.

And I also felt affronted by the implied insult to all men being seen as potential rapists.

And the further implication that the women in society have absolutely no social influence at all.

This is no longer the case. equality campaigners used to 'forget' abut women, and only meant men. Even then, there were some women who still had enough influence to be heard. Mary Wollstonecraft, for instance, in relatively modern times, though there have historically been others.

Women are no longer invisible, Historians are looking into women's history now, which was often overlooked.

Things are changing, and this thread seems so negative and disempoweringin comparison to the positive changes being made all the time.

Edited March 6, 2015 by feral chile

[russycarps]

No. I felt threatened by the veiled threat in your comment that I'm only safe in my own house or outside, because my husband, sons, male neighbours and workmates etc. have chosen they don't want to rape me.

And I also felt affronted by the implied insult to all men being seen as potential rapists.

And the further implication that the women in society have absolutely no social influence at all.

well if I was a woman I think I would have a fear of men and a sense of powerlessness, albeit to a very small degree.

It's like in war when a town is conquered and the soldiers come in and rape all the women. It's horrific. I'm sure a lot of the soldiers that do the raping before they signed up were completely normal, civilized men.

I have less faith in our so-called civilized society than you.

Edited March 6, 2015 by russycarps

[eFestivals]

I haven't seen any discussion of evidence

And nor have I, probably because each time i'd asked you for some evidence for your dismissal of an idea you've run away from attempting to provide the evidence for your view.

Mind you, every time I've tried to pin anyone down t anything other than vague assertions about power I've been accused of not being able to see what's obvious. Self evident truths are dodgy as shit, and I'm surprised you're going down that route, with your faith in science.

You avoid getting pinned down, by avoiding the questions you don't like.

To find evidence you have to be prepared to look for and at evidence, instead of dismissing ideas simply because you don't like them.

But hey, if evidence are your own evidence-free assertions you'll always be right.

[feral chile]

And nor have I, probably because each time i'd asked you for some evidence for your dismissal of an idea you've run away from attempting to provide the evidence for your view.

You avoid getting pinned down, by avoiding the questions you don't like.

To find evidence you have to be prepared to look for and at evidence, instead of dismissing ideas simply because you don't like them.

But hey, if evidence are your own evidence-free assertions you'll always be right.

I don't understand what you mean. What evidence can you give for an interpretation of society?

If you were saying to me, prove there are as many female biologists as male, it's something I could research.

Not that I've been able to find any statistical evidence on any of this.

Look, it's a very short step from saying men have the power to saying men have the right.

And that's part of why I resist.

But I think this thread is probably way oemotive for me. I don't know if the 1970s were a similar experience for all women, but I can assure you, there was definitely a rape culture in existence in some areas of the UK in the 1970s.

And therefore, for me, that very fact that there's not a general rape culture in the UK is proof that patriarchy is not as prevalent as it once was.

That's my evidence.

Edited March 6, 2015 by feral chile

[feral chile]

well if I was a woman I think I would have a fear of men and a sense of powerlessness, albeit to a very small degree.

It's like in war when a town is conquered and the soldiers come in and rape all the women. It's horrific. I'm sure a lot of the soldiers that do the raping before they signed up were completely normal, civilized men.

I have less faith in our so-called civilized society than you.

Yes, I agree. Rape is used as a demoraliser. And I agree, there's definitely a patriarchal streak to it - disempowering men by using their failure to protect their women - using their belief in their own power against them. And it's the ultimate demoraliser of women themselves, of course. It's intended to make a woman feel like a thing, not human.

It's sick.

This is why I'm getting so upset:

http://www.rapecrisis.org.uk/rapeampsexualviolence2.php

100% of the responsibility for any act of sexual violence lies with its perpetrator. There is no excuse for sexual violence – it can never be justified, it can never be explained away and there is no context in which it is valid, understandable or acceptable.

No context is acceptable. It's no justification to say 'well it's war/patriarchy, innit'?

And like I say, it's a dangerous argument, because lots of people believe might is right.

A sympathetic male colleague of mine taught me self defence once, including a few moves that apparently could kill.

Now I'm not stupid, I know the odds of being able to use it would be limited in a real life situation, you could be incapacitated either physically or from fear before you'd even think of reacting, but it did help.

Anything that enables women to feel empowered helps.

And this thread is the very opposite of that.

Edited March 6, 2015 by feral chile

[gary1979666]

Crikey, I gave up on this thread around page 6 or 7 and then in a moment of boredom came back and have skimmed the last few pages. It's seems to have just gone round and round, as you're pretty much doing the same as you were on the General News thread when it was hijacked. Patriarchy this, show me evidence that, page 3 the other, whose fault is rape the other other,....

[feral chile]

Crikey, I gave up on this thread around page 6 or 7 and then in a moment of boredom came back and have skimmed the last few pages. It's seems to have just gone round and round, as you're pretty much doing the same as you were on the General News thread when it was hijacked. Patriarchy this, show me evidence that, page 3 the other, whose fault is rape the other other,....

What would you like to discuss then gary?

[gary1979666]

Yes, I agree. Rape is used as a demoraliser. And I agree, there's definitely a patriarchal streak to it - disempowering men by using their failure to protect their women - using their belief in their own power against them.

It's sick.

This is why I'm getting so upset:

http://www.rapecrisis.org.uk/rapeampsexualviolence2.php

100% of the responsibility for any act of sexual violence lies with its perpetrator. There is no excuse for sexual violence – it can never be justified, it can never be explained away and there is no context in which it is valid, understandable or acceptable.

No context is acceptable. It's no justification to say 'well it's war/patriarchy, innit'?

And like I say, it's a dangerous argument, because lots of people believe might is right.

A sympathetic male colleague of mine taught me self defence once, including a few moves that apparently could kill.

Now I'm not stupid, I know the odds of being able to use it would be limited in a real life situation, you could be incapacitated either physically or from fear before you'd even think of reacting, but it did help.

Anything that enables women to feel empowered helps.

And this thread is the very opposite of that.

As I said, I'd skimmed this thread, but I would seriously dount that any of the posters here would say there is a justification of rape. Yes Russy mentioned it was done in war, but in no way did he condone it.

I doubt anyone would say that the perpetrator isn't the one at fault during a rape. Though, as we saw in the Ched Evans thread, we saw numerous debates about the definition of consent. But in the most straightforward (i.e. the worst) of cases - non-consent is very clear.

To put it bluntly, rape is a crime and to protect yourself against any crime, whatever it's nature (e.g. don't leave valuables on your back seat if you want to avoid your car being broken into) is sensible. You shouldn't have to, but each crime must be made up of a number of factors that make it more likely.

[eFestivals]

Look, it's a very short step from saying men have the power to saying men have the right.

and yet your posts here are stuffed full of admissions that men DO have the power.

Nothing of that says they have the right to that power, but don't let that stop you from making it up.

[russycarps]

Yes, I agree. Rape is used as a demoraliser. And I agree, there's definitely a patriarchal streak to it - disempowering men by using their failure to protect their women - using their belief in their own power against them. And it's the ultimate demoraliser of women themselves, of course. It's intended to make a woman feel like a thing, not human.

It's sick.

This is why I'm getting so upset:

http://www.rapecrisis.org.uk/rapeampsexualviolence2.php

100% of the responsibility for any act of sexual violence lies with its perpetrator. There is no excuse for sexual violence – it can never be justified, it can never be explained away and there is no context in which it is valid, understandable or acceptable.

No context is acceptable. It's no justification to say 'well it's war/patriarchy, innit'?

And like I say, it's a dangerous argument, because lots of people believe might is right.

A sympathetic male colleague of mine taught me self defence once, including a few moves that apparently could kill.

Now I'm not stupid, I know the odds of being able to use it would be limited in a real life situation, you could be incapacitated either physically or from fear before you'd even think of reacting, but it did help.

Anything that enables women to feel empowered helps.

And this thread is the very opposite of that.

I dont think anyone here has ever suggested anything other than the rapist is 100% responsible of the crime. No one denies that.

But the thread is about men and women, and the balance of power. This is just an example of the power mens have. It's an unpleasant truth, and one that you seem to have been denying. Perhaps I misunderstood.

[gary1979666]

how should a woman protect herself against being raped?

As Feral suggested - self defence. May not be particularly effective, but can help. About as much as me knowing it to help in a mugging. (I know the impact of the crime is different, but as said earlier)

Making sensible decisions - a dark alley at night - yes, you should be able to walk it without fear of anything, but I'd walk an extra 10 min in a well lit area to avoid it. Getting completely bladdered so that you don;t know what you're doing, etc

They are not specifically things to stop a rape - it's basic common sense precautions that you should take to avoid muggings, thefts, etc, even me as a 17 stone bloke take. It's not about men or women, it just about people.

Like all crimes, it might not stop them happening, if a perpetrator is intent on trying something, then at least make it as hard as possible for them (bad choice of words?)