Practical Tools for Men to Further the Feminist Revolution

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 47027
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
This strikes me as very condescending.

Yes, some of it is obvious and largely just extends to, "Be an equal partner, communicate, don't be a creep, and be aware of the effort your partner puts in. Try to reciprocate"

But some of these points... A bit obnoxious and condescending.
 
Sure there is, but my point is why do women need to "be" feminist when they already have equal rights. If these rights are not respected that's why the police and courts exist.

I know, right? Why do things like the ACLU even exist after the Civil Rights Movement? Don't they know that they already won and racism is over?

Spoilers: Equal rights on paper does not mean the same thing as equal treatment in practice, and legal action against individual incidents is not the only way to fight for the latter.
 
i suspect that asking women for sympathy around being TALKED TO IN AN OBNOXIOUS AND CONDESCENDING FASHION might not elicit the tears of self-recrimination a good white male might hope for
 
Okay... so what are the relevant statistics here? I mean, I think I was pretty clear that I was just using easy-to-find numbers for the sake of a quick calculation. Homicide and rape statistics are easy numbers to find. Surely you don't think that the racial skew of mugging statistics is going to be anywhere near the gender skew of sexual harassment statistics, right?

It's not about the gender though. Yes, most sexual abuse is committed by men; however, it's also true that the majority of sexual abuse is committed by men close to the victim. The chances of rape occurring are already low (when walking on the street for example) and the risk of getting raped by a stranger is even lower. That's why the fear is somewhat irrational.
 
It's funny, I like or love most of the ideals of feminism but hate the term.

I've said it before, but mostly it's a branding problem. A while ago I asked my wife if she was a feminist and she answered no. I asked her why and she said that she just believed in equality.

And that's the thing; ask most people
- in the West at least -
if they believe in gender equality and they'll say yes. And isn't that what we're aiming for?
 
It's not about the gender though. Yes, most sexual abuse is committed by men; however, it's also true that the majority of sexual abuse is committed by men close to the victim. The chances of rape occurring are already low (when walking on the street for example) and the risk of getting raped by a stranger is even lower. That's why the fear is somewhat irrational.

women love hearing about the irrationality of their behaviors from men. :nods: clearly a rational strategy
 
It's not about the gender though. Yes, most sexual abuse is committed by men; however, it's also true that the majority of sexual abuse is committed by men close to the victim. The chances of rape occurring are already low (when walking on the street for example) and the risk of getting raped by a stranger is even lower. That's why the fear is somewhat irrational.

Not at York University.
 
Indeed. But then again, this thread and other female based threads give good insight into why so many people on GAF have trouble with women. I go through these threads, and I can't begin to feel bad for the lonely dudes on GAF.

Yeah, here I am thinking I wouldn't see this 4chan level of contempt over feminism on this site.
 
Remember that thing you said about people not having an argument saying dumb things.

You're totally doing it.

you're right i shouldnt go down to that level.

how is he posting while banned anyways?

It's a regular tag that reads "banned" and custom formatting applied to his name.

im going to assume it's some sort of GAF celebrity whose schtick is whatever is happening and i bit the bait.
 
women love hearing about the irrationality of their behaviors from men. :nods: clearly a rational strategy

But Drinky Crow, how are those poor misguided women ever going to learn if we don't mansplain it to them?

You are among my favorite posters and it's an honor to be in the same thread as you.

you're right i shouldnt go down to that level.

how is he posting while banned anyways?

It's a regular tag that reads "banned" and custom formatting applied to his name.
 
some point are ok, most of them are way over the top. "when you leave home wrap yourself in bubblewrap because you may hurt women"
 
Are you actually going to explain what you said or...

It was competently explained the first time. Try reading the words I actually wrote and stop applying all this additional context to it. Don't you realize I could find someone's ideology disgusting without calling them "evil liars"? I prefaced the post by saying that I treat all people equally. Equally nice when we pass by in public, equally mean when you insult or disparage me. I don't treat women like precious porcelain dolls because some of them can't engage in small talk with a man without feeling violated.
 
It's not about the gender though. Yes, most sexual abuse is committed by men; however, it's also true that the majority of sexual abuse is committed by men close to the victim. The chances of rape occurring are already low (when walking on the street for example) and the risk of getting raped by a stranger is even lower. That's why the fear is somewhat irrational.

It's not irrational if she gets attacked that night is it.

Also if you think 33% of assaults being strangers can be waved off as "irrational." Or the very real experience of general harassment is somehow "beyond the norm". Then I have to tell you, get some perspective please.
 
It's not about the gender though. Yes, most sexual abuse is committed by men; however, it's also true that the majority of sexual abuse is committed by men close to the victim. The chances of rape occurring are already low (when walking on the street for example) and the risk of getting raped by a stranger is even lower. That's why the fear is somewhat irrational.

It's not just sexual assault, there's also the fear of getting harassed or stalked, which is shockingly common.
 
Seems very poorly worded and not particularly thought out, with opinions stemming from myths and stereotypes instead of facts.

Tumblr (and GAF OT) in a nutshell.

EDIT: and the ongoing discussion is as thrilling as ever, almost on par with recent race threads.
 
im going to assume it's some sort of GAF celebrity whose schtick is whatever is happening and i bit the bait.

Not a celebrity so much as an ancient legend who is occasionally called from the world of dreams to deliver real talk.

Seems very poorly worded and not particularly thought out, with opinions stemming from myths and stereotypes instead of facts.

Tumblr (and GAF OT) in a nutshell.

Okay.
 
It's not just sexual assault, there's also the fear of getting harassed or stalked, which is shockingly common.

Nah we're just paranoid people who don't undergo these things. All our imagination! I don't avoid a street every damn time I go to work and come home to avoid the catcalls. I'm just irrational obviously.
 
The content of the list matters. We can't reduce it to its most basic "true message" and give it a gold star for trying to do something good. Good messages can have bad content. As I and many people have pointed out, there's a worrying tone throughout the entire list about men, male sexuality, etc. Furthermore a lot of people disagree with the "make up for it and then some" style of reaching equality that the author is presenting.

I don't think reducing something to "the true message" helps. Because at that point aren't we saying that virtually anything that is written from a feminist perspective is automatically good because the "gist of it" or the "true message" is a good one?

There's a lot more to any piece of writing than the base message it's trying to present.


Never said the contents didn't matter. Clearly I said the list has its flaws.

Many posts in here have noted their concerns without trying to tear the whole damn thing down and reduce its value to dust because "Tumblr oh no!".

Even solid research into every major topic in the world will have its iffy parts. No shit. But attempting to burn the whole argument and list down because of a few sketchy claims? Get the fuck outta here.

It's just desperation to me. You know damn well the message is solid and there's too many logical points to simply try dismissing the whole thing.

Again, the list isn't without flaws (I myself disagree with a few points) but these are not supposed to be used for bullshit excuses to lash out against feminism.
 
girls. GIRLS! spergboys require two things from you:

1) YOU MUST PROVIDE US WITH CLEAR, ACKNOWLEDGED RULES SO WE MAY SUCCESSFULLY INTERACT WITH YOU. please keep them very simple. we should not have to feel shame or anger. that is not what we are accustomed to, and it only keeps you from experiencing how amazing we are.

2) YOU MUST REALIZE THAT STATISTICS TRUMP EMOTIONAL RESPONSE. history and personal experience are the province of your uterus, and you compromise your equality by not recognizing the truth of the numbers. culture is nonsense, and we cannot help you if you do not treat DATA with the gravity it deserves.
 
GAF is usually pretty progressive in regards to politics and religion. This thread has left me shaking my head.

It really isn't. You might think GAF is on the "correct side" of these subjects, but plenty of posters don't know why.

2) YOU MUST REALIZE THAT STATISTICS TRUMP EMOTIONAL RESPONSE. history and personal experience are the province of your uterus, and you compromise your equality by not recognizing the truth of the numbers. culture is nonsense, and we cannot help you if you do not treat DATA with the gravity it deserves.

Those wannabe-Spock types that try to be cold and rational with numbers are the worst.
 
It's not just sexual assault, there's also the fear of getting harassed or stalked, which is shockingly common.

It's not irrational if she gets attacked that night is it.

Also if you think 33% of assaults being strangers can be waved off as "irrational." Or the very real experience of general harassment is somehow "beyond the norm". Then I have to tell you, get some perspective please.


I was responding to the comparison between white people being scared of african americans and women being scared of men. So by that same token, if I'm walking out and see a black man and automatically assume the worse, is that right? I'd say it's racial profiling since the chances of that black man mugging me (just like a male stranger abusing a woman) or worse is very low. I would not demand that all black men walk across the street or make a point of avoiding discomfort for white folk. That fear is just is irrational.

That's all I'm saying, both fears are based on the same fear of something that is unlikely to happen.
 
If she is “nagging,” you are probably lagging.

BlCHo3t.gif
 
It's not a bad list except for the nagging part.

I think it's definitely worth pointing out that the "nagging wife" is definitely a cultural idea that a lot of people buy into and use to dismiss legitimate concerns. It's not saying that your wife's or girlriend's complaints are always 100% reasonable and you can never disagree with them, but that you should try not to look at them through the common cultural lens of "nagging." It's a heuristic, and a bad one.
 
There are some pretty obvious differences here, though, such that someone who wants to say that men have a duty to be careful not to make women uncomfortable isn't necessarily committed to saying that black people have the same duty re: white people. Let's pass over the white privilege angle and just talk about the anxiety being felt by the woman or white man walking down the street.

The fears aren't equally reasonable. We're not going to have exactly the statistics we'd want, but as a first pass we can look and see that for every black-on-white homicide there are about five white-on-white homicides, which is pretty close to the black:white ratio in the population (actually it is slightly lower). On the other hand, male-on-X homicide is much more common than any other sort. Rape, at least outside of prisons (which obviously is a different context than walking down the street), is heavily skewed towards male offenders and female victims. Some studies also suggest that female victimization is depressingly common, such that it's not unreasonable for women to be somewhat anxious in many situations where white men wouldn't be anxious and shouldn't be anxious, even if there are scary black people around.

Because people have a stronger likelihood to kill someone who is closer to them (~30% more likely to be killed by someone you know) combined with the fact that people are more likely to befriend/ socialise within their own race, you could make the argument that on the street, you're much more likely to be murdered by a black person. Can't find many specific statistics, though an article has a figure that says between 1980 and 2008, 16% of white people where killed by non-whites, and 7% of black people killed by non-blacks, and another has that in 2008 the homicide victimization rate for blacks (19.6 homicides per 100,000) was 6 times higher than the rate for whites (3.3 homicides per 100,000), but the offending rate for blacks (24.7 offenders per 100,000) was 7 times higher than the rate for whites (3.4 offenders per 100,000).

I wish there was more definitive statistics but the point remains: if it were the case that there was empirical evidence that black people were more likely to be the instigators in street harassment/ street violence/ street homocide, would it be reasonable to expect that black people cross the street/ not take a seat next to me/ stand at a distance so I don't have to feel anxious? Hell no, it'd be wrong.
 
The contraception subject to me is both people should be paying for it if it means less problems acquiring it and less stress/unwanted pregnancies/babies. From what I've seen many couples pool their financial resources anyway, so it rarely comes out of "just her pocket."

I can see how a man paying for that shit would bother plenty of women though. Some like to take charge of their own crap and really don't want the burden of the man paying. It's kind of refreshing to take charge of your reproductive destiny without having some dude involved in the process. If I was single or living alone I wouldn't like some guy being "charitable" in that way. It'd feel controlling.

I can see where the argument comes from but at the same time it's one of those things that I want for myself and I don't want interference from other parties or to suddenly be financially dependent on a guy for what I consider my needs. It just makes me feel like daddy's getting my prescription. Now, I'm rambling so excuse me.
Makes the whole thing also look like an exchange. Imagine how awkward it would be if your partner gives you the money for the contraceptives right after the sex.
 
I was responding to the comparison between white people being scared of african americans and women being scared of men. So by that same token, if I'm walking out and see a black man and automatically assume the worse, is that right? I'd say it's racial profiling since the chances of that black man mugging me (just like a male stranger abusing a woman) or worse is very low. I would not demand that all black men walk across the street or make a point of avoiding discomfort for white folk. That fear is just is irrational.

That's all I'm saying, both fears are based on the same fear of something that is unlikely to happen.

Street harassment is really fucking common though
 
I was responding to the comparison between white people being scared of african americans and women being scared of men. So by that same token, if I'm walking out and see a black man and automatically assume the worse, is that right? I'd say it's racial profiling since the chances of that black man mugging me (just like a male stranger abusing a woman) or worse is very low. I would not demand that all black men walk across the street or make a point of avoiding discomfort for white folk. That fear is just is irrational.

That's all I'm saying, both fears are based on the same fear of something that is unlikely to happen.

Again, how many times must I reiterate that there are blocks I specifically avoid because harassment is an inevitability.
 
I do most of this stuff already as part of being a decent human being, but I feel like this type of writing comes off as patronizing for those who are likely sympathetic to the cause, and probably never reaches the people it's intended for.
 
This statement strikes me as pretty unempathetic. Is it the woman's fault that she feels violated?

You illustrate the point. How is any man supposed to know that this particular woman will feel threatened by him engaging her in conversation... without engaging her in conversation? Are you saying we shouldn't engage them at all? How will people fall in love, fuck, and propagate the human species like we've been doing for millions of years? How fragile is your psyche that a man simply approaching you with small talk is a terrifying experience? Oh no, he might be attracted to me!

Here's a girl who agrees with me.
 
I think it's definitely worth pointing out that the "nagging wife" is definitely a cultural idea that a lot of people buy into and use to dismiss legitimate concerns. It's not saying that your wife's or girlriend's complaints are always 100% reasonable and you can never disagree with them, but that you should try not to look at them through the common cultural lens of "nagging." It's a heuristic, and a bad one.
Yeah, I don't disagree with that. I will quickly bail on anyone (man or woman) who nags me, though.
 
You illustrate the point. How is any man supposed to know that this particular woman will feel threatened by him engaging her in conversation... without engaging her in conversation? Are you saying we shouldn't engage them at all? How will people fall in love, fuck, and propagate the human species like we've been doing for millions of years? How fragile is your psyche that a man simply approaching you with small talk is a terrifying experience? Oh no, he might be attracted to me!

Here's a girl who agrees with me.

PICK YOUR TIME AND PLACE BETTER. learn to READ body language. it's quite easy if you WANT to, when your culture isn't excusing you from learning.
 
Never said the contents didn't matter. Clearly I said the list has its flaws.

Many posts in here have noted their concerns without trying to tear the whole damn thing down and reduce its value to dust because "Tumblr oh no!".

Even solid research into every major topic in the world will have its iffy parts. No shit. But attempting to burn the whole argument and list down because of a few sketchy claims? Get the fuck outta here.

It's just desperation to me. You know damn well the message is solid and there's too many logical points to simply try dismissing the whole thing.

Again, the list isn't without flaws (I myself disagree with a few points) but these are not supposed to be used for bullshit excuses to lash out against feminism.

Indeed. And if those are the types of people that you directed that post at then I apologize.

That said you should ignore the "lel tumbrrrrr" posters. They aren't contributing to the conversation anyway. Don't give the ones who write everything off that way the time of day.

Personally I'm not writing off the whole list because she said one or two things I don't like (And I'm not saying you're saying I am). I take significant issue with her explanations of many of her points, as well as the overall tone of the entire piece, so that's a lot. And personally I don't give many points for the message if the content isn't there to back it up for me. This would be true if it was about any other topic as well.
 
It's not about the gender though. Yes, most sexual abuse is committed by men; however, it's also true that the majority of sexual abuse is committed by men close to the victim. The chances of rape occurring are already low (when walking on the street for example) and the risk of getting raped by a stranger is even lower. That's why the fear is somewhat irrational.

It is the daily experience of many women that they get sexually harassed. Empty bus, only person on it, then a guy gets on and sits next to them. When they glance over he's looking down her shirt. Happens to a few girls I know on at least a monthly basis. Going out for a run and guys ogle you the entire time. Walking down the street and some guy is staring at your ass. I mean women aren't oblivious to this, and he but happens all the time every day as soon as they rocket past puberty it's no wonder that guys can make them uneasy. Combine that with ample stories and often firsthand experiences of groping and sexual assaults and a clear differential in strength and physical ability and you can see why they'd be nervous. Most guys check girls out discreetly , but there is a minority of real jerks that give normal guys a bad name. Don't get mad at women for this, got mad at those jerks creeping on women.
 
It's not about the gender though. Yes, most sexual abuse is committed by men; however, it's also true that the majority of sexual abuse is committed by men close to the victim. The chances of rape occurring are already low (when walking on the street for example) and the risk of getting raped by a stranger is even lower. That's why the fear is somewhat irrational.

This is a different point than what was being argued, though. My first post in this thread was arguing that special fear of black strangers over white strangers was much less reasonable than special fear of male strangers over female strangers. I was responding to someone who thought that thinking that men have a special responsibility to not make strange women uncomfortable commits you to thinking that black people have a special responsibility to not make strange white people uncomfortable.

If you want to argue that people fear strangers too much in general, you're welcome to go for it, though I'm not sure this is really the thread for it. Maybe you're right insofar as people are bad about thinking about low-probability events, and we tend to treat them as being nearly impossible or as being much more likely than they really are. But it'd be wrong to cast this as women being notably irrational; this is just something everyone does, and probably we should accommodate it in specific instances rather than telling particular groups of people to not be so anxious, at least when it doesn't carry unfortunate baggage (this feeds into talk about privilege, so let's not worry too much about the caveat).
 
You illustrate the point. How is any man supposed to know that this particular woman will feel threatened by him engaging her in conversation... without engaging her in conversation? Are you saying we shouldn't engage them at all? How will people fall in love, fuck, and propagate the human species like we've been doing for millions of years? How fragile is your psyche that a man simply approaching you with small talk is a terrifying experience? Oh no, he might be attracted to me!

Here's a girl who agrees with me.

I don't think anyone has argued that being approached or engaged in conversation is always a case of intense intimidation regardless of context, but that it can make someone highly uncomfortable if you approach them in a situation where they could reasonably want to be left alone.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom