Just as men have in the past behaved badly and got away with it because the women can’t prove the fact adequately to bring them to book so now there seems to be a compensating movement to allow women to behave badly by libellous accusations against men without repercussions. When men don’t go along with it and attempt to challenge the facts as happened with Amber Herd and in this Stephen Elliott case the outrage seems to be directed against men for challenging the narrative and requiring the accusations be proved.
It seems to be all part of the woke contempt for provable facts. Allegations can be thrown by a member of the victim class that even when demonstrably false do little to diminish the force of the accusations on the grounds that they are the victim’s truth. Weird behaviour can be elided into rape or speculation about skin colour into racism and that is fine if it is made against one of the supposed privileged class.
“Just as men have in the past behaved badly and got away with it ”
What was this bad behaviour that we keep reading about? Dying by the millions in war after war, while the women stated safe in their homes? Working in brutal, unsafe industries or occupations to feed and house their families? Its interesting how women, while going on and on about awful men, are not very keen on any of those perks of the patriarchy – not very keen on extending conscription to women, being breadwinners or working in truck transport or oil rigs, are they?
And it’s also worth noting that most of the reasons women are safer than 5000 years back, is due to men. Men invented the technologies that improved female health outcomes and reduced the burden of household work, men introduced laws criminalising violence against women and formed the police forces that enforced those laws.
The funniest thing here? The women whining about unfounded metoo allegations actually rely on male CEOs and leaders to believe their hysterics and throw innocent men under the bus with no evidence. After all, if you #believe all women#, as you supposedly should (**) men control the world.
** Unless it’s an allegation against a Democrat presidential candidate, of course
That was a very defensive reply, that hints at insecurity on your part to my eyes.
I thought it was obvious what behaviour the poster was referring to, and to pretend it never happened simply because men have had it worse in other aspects of life seems slightly pathetic
“…and to pretend it never happened simply because men have had it worse in other aspects of life seems slightly pathetic”
You’re missing the important point that #meToo’s defence against the the charge that it should be held accountable is based on the wider ideology of opposing patriarchal oppression. It is in other words a political position, and that means that Samir’s comment is wholly defensible, and really can’t be criticised on the basis you’re attempting.
Of course I can criticise it. He’s implying that the original post about men abusing their position is wrong because men had it hard in the past. Most people who are slightly more nuanced can see that yes some men did have it hard in the past, and that some men also abused their power in their treatment of women. I’m quite capable of believing that the way metoo essentially condemned men as guilty simply by an accusation is morally wrong, but that also some men are dangerous sexual predators.
Stop it. You’re no nickel psychiatrist.
He’s right on the money. If they read a little history, the Pound Me, Too (#MeToo) founders would have realized that women’s proclivity to falsely accuse men has been understood and accounted-for for millennia. Although probably not a good example, Islam’s weighting of a woman’s testimony half that of a man’s is not just by accident.
Most of what you say I would not disagree with as is usually the case when you post.
However, I did think it clear that the bad behaviour by men complained of was in the context of the article about rape and sexual assault and there can be no doubt that many men have got away with these because there was insufficient corroboration beyond the woman’s word to result in a conviction or even for the claim to proceed to Court. That is inevitable so long as we require (as we should) that a jury is satisfied that such an assault took place as sex is something that is normally mutually sought and enjoyed and some additional evidence would rightly be required to establish that this was not the case beyond the mere assertion of the supposed victim.
In this sense your comments do not appear to be germane to or in refutation of the sentence you quote.
Despite the difficulty that women often find themselves in proving that they have been sexually assaulted to the satisfaction of a jury, the establishment of an Internet forum for women to make unsupported allegations that are not subject to proper scrutiny but which can result in social and professional ostracism of the man is a throughly undesirable development. It is entirely right that men should have recourse to the law to clear their names of any such false charges and the idea that women should be shielded from this by angry denunciation is a piece of woke absurdity.
This is the inevitable conclusion of identity politics. The casual nature of metoo to apply broad brush allegations against men with seemingly no requirement for evidence using patriarchy theory as its underlying thesis will naturally result in that kind of response.
The emergent consequence is inevitable division.
It is worse than hat, Andrew. No sane man considers approaching a woman these days, and that alone will bring a sad end (in reproductive terms) to the shit-show of unaccountability masked as “feminism”. Let’s hope that other cultures around the world (the ones escaping this suicidal drive) will see it for what it is.
The problem is that metoo and it’s supporters have zero interest in sexual assault in the conventional sense – involving physical or mental coercion or grooming of young girls. If anything, the most vociferous female supporters of this movement coincide with those who do their best to defend the grooming gangs or refuse to pinpoint high crime rates against women by “victim groups” in Detroit or Chicago.
So which rapes are we talking about, where as you say “many men have got away” and is the focus for metoo?
Well, consider the following cases of “rape” where the rapist used to “get away”:
– Victim willingly goes to a party, gets drunk, sleeps willingly with someone equally drunk and decides to regret the next morning
– Victim sleeps with a film producer, or CEO, goes around freely with the “rapist” in exchange for career benefits and then discovers was “raped” a few years later.
– Victim sleeps with or exchanges naughty text messages with college professor, continues sleeping and communicating normally with the prof for months – before discovering years later it was “rape”
– Victim in an army unit beats up other soldiers in a rage, and when about to be punished recalls being “raped” on a night when multiple other soldiers were sleeping in the same tent.
All of the above were real or close to real incidents of “rape”.
Here is the catch though.
Imagine all of those “victims” were white males.
What do you think would happen if and when they came forward with their stories of “rape”?
The identitareans in general have refined hypocrisy and double standards to god-like levels.
It’s hardly surprising when the underlying ideology is glued together by contradictions.
Unfortunately, the idea that ‘sex is something that is normally mutually sought and enjoyed’ is very much confined to the beliefs and practices of a small section of both time and culture. Outside our little bubble, sex has always been, and still is, regarded as the right of men and the lot of women, a social order predicated on the generally superior physical strength of men.
That being the case, it is a tragedy to see dishonest women choosing to destroy a man’s reputation and life with blatant disregard for what is factually true.
Utter rot! In which century do you believe that men have had it so much harder than women?
Bad behaviour is bad behaviour. Rape is rape. False allegations are false allegations. But a whine like this is about trying to position oneself as a member of a victim class. You too? Really?
Apparently you can now be “accused” of offering an unsolicited invitation to come to your home. How about an unsolicited invitation to have a drink, or to go out for dinner? I’m amazed that people manage to arrange dates at all these days.
That’s exactly what I thought. Invitations are nearly always unsolicited, but importantly, invitations can always be refused. I suppose that if a person keeps inviting you and you’ve made clear that you want nothing to do with that person then it borders on harassment, but this didn’t seem to be the scenario being described.
Most marriages have started with some unsolicited invitation from the man.
I suppose woke men are now expected to sit demurely casting brief shy glances at the objects of their affection hoping they might be noticed and that the empowered woman deign to make some unsolicited suggestion that could lead to a sexual encounter after which they should sit by the phone hoping to be called if their performance was adequate.
No wonder there are apparently a lot of incels if unsolicited invitations are classified as equivalent to sexual assault.
Young men ought to know by now that many women are “woke in the streets, gender roles in the sheets” to coin a phrase. This is because women follow the woke rules for social protection and professional advancement. But of course women actually want men to be rebellious and objective. They want to be led away from that all that girlish subjectivity and conformity. In short women, even those who work in media, academia or non-profits, still want a man to be a man. So a man who stands up to woke rules and fantasies will be recognized at once to be masculine and, therefore, attractive.
Meanwhile other men, especially the young and inexperienced, being fearful of the obvious consequences of confronting female subjectivity, such as social ostracism or professional cancellation, do as you say and to a greater or lesser degree become “incels.” Or many calculate that it’s just not worth the trouble to demonstrate masculinity for women who have no idea what that is and what it’s worth. After all children are taught that history is nothing more than a series of oppressions caused by straight white men.
Other men recognize subjective woke spaces as fertile ground for indulging their deviant behavior among naive if not brainwashed women, spaces I might add where there simply aren’t any masculine men around who would otherwise put a stop to the woke man’s escapades.
Men in leadership roles elsewhere, who are more likely to be targets of a MeToo plot, than to be rapists, long ago decided not to meet alone with women in the workplace and so on. Behavior which of course women deride, as it negates one of their strategies.
Why is it men think they know what women want? Do any of you actually ask a woman what she wants rather than surmising? When we, my other half and I, got together 37 years ago, it was by having conversations about all sorts of things including liking other people, sex and what boundaries we both had. It must have worked as we are still together. Maybe if more people had these discussions/conversations, more couples would get together and stay together?
When Brett Kavanaugh was accused of running a college rape gang, a local radio guy was all in, echoing the accusations as indisputable. I argued that, aside from being ludicrously implausible, there was zero evidence. The radio guy said that, as the father of three daughters, he was compelled to “believe all women”, the catch phrase of the day. I said “So, if you gave one of your daughter’s friends a ride home after a sleepover and she then publicly accused you of groping her, should everyone, including your employer, believe her?” He stopped talking to me after that.
Is there a Shtty Media Woman equivalent? Thought not.
Last edited 1 year ago by Allison Barrows
Frank McCusker
1 year ago
Women being raped in Ukraine and brave women being shot and beaten up by mad mullahs in Iran.
Meantime, white western feminists fulminate about micro-aggressions, bad sex regret, and manspreading on the tube.
Am I missing something? Don’t black western feminists fulminate about the same things? I thought black women were supposed to be particularly exercised by micro-aggressions.
Hugh Bryant
1 year ago
It doesn’t matter. Just as it doesn’t matter that women can’t have penises, or that George Floyd wasn’t murdered, or that there’s no such thing as ‘free movement of labour’, or that you can’t feed five thousand people with five loaves and two fishes. These are Symbolic Truths. The Age of Enlightenment is over.
Got that?
Chris Hume
1 year ago
unsolicited invitations
Do people often solicit invitations? What a bizarre phrase.
John Riordan
1 year ago
“Illuminated here is the fundamental tension at the heart of MeToo: it is very difficult to demand that sexual assault be taken seriously, but simultaneously insist that false allegations thereof are no big deal.”
It really says something that even nowadays, in this supposedly kinder, gentler world we’re constantly told we inhabit, that this actually needs to be explained.
False allegations are a massive big deal; not only for the men falsely accused, but for any woman who was actually assaulted, because it puts into the jury’s mind that false accusations are common. Anyone who thinks differently needs to explain to me, in words of one syllable, why it is not harmful.
It is rather bizarre.
And one more point to the two you have already made is this: were the allegations not harmful, they wouldn’t be made due to them not accomplishing anything.
Linda Hutchinson
1 year ago
Whereas I do feel for those women who have never been able to get any justice for sexual harassment in the past, this type of behaviour is not acceptable. These are un-proven accusations which can destroy a man’s life, maybe he is guilty, who knows? It also gives a forum for deliberately false allegations by anyone with a grudge e.g. an angry ex-wife. It doesn’t even need to be a woman; it could be a business rival or cuckolded husband. If someone has been assaulted the only way forward is to report it to the proper authorities. It can always be difficult, often it is a “he said she said” situation, but there is no other fair way that I can see. Perhaps we should think about simply ensuring that we are not alone with a member of the opposite sex, that way women are not assaulted and men not falsely accused – back to chaperons.
I do find it a little strange that this guy shares information about his sex life with women; I wouldn’t do so with a man (I probably wouldn’t with a woman, either) no matter how friendly I was with him. But perhaps I just old-fashioned that way, and this is acceptable behaviour nowadays.
Rasmus Fogh
1 year ago
Could everybody *PLEASE* stop saying ‘sexual assault’ when they clearly mean ‘rape’?
By law, ‘sexual assault’ means everything down to an unwanted pat on the bum (see here) , and is *not* in any way a serious crime. The confusion is often used as, effectively, a feminist argument. Since sexual assault is quite common (true), and rape is very serious (true), confusing the two gives a false impression that rape is much more common than it really is.
David Jennings
1 year ago
Thank you Kat Rosenfield for another superb article: well written, nuanced thought and tackling a difficult subject.
William Shaw
1 year ago
This brings to mind the saying that women act on feelings, not facts.
Genuine rape victims suffer because too many women lie about rape.
The Believe All Women movement suffers because women lie about rape.
Women are too eager for vengeance and too committed to misandry.
Maybe some nuance? ‘Some women’ is not the same as ‘women’.
Accusing all women of misandry might risk you being accused of misogyny.
Kevin R
1 year ago
This story makes me think of the problem of ‘revenge porn’ – some women seem to be using this ‘list’ in the same spirit as some angry men are sharing intimate images of ex partners.
So this guy talks about sex right out of the gate. OK, whatever.
And if I ran into a woman who did the same, I would run away after the first couple minutes of meeting her. Just a little too loopy for my taste and, frankly, a waste of my time; thank you very much.
I think my wife had (has) it right: she does not need a man and so got a half decent one. And did not have to “kiss too many frogs” along the way either.
And the same sort of thing held true for me: I knew how to masturbate to fulfill a young man’s natural urges and so was just as happy to head home if I ran into a nut bar or a sane women who just wasn’t into me.
Maybe I am missing something, but it doesn’t seem all that complicated.
On a related, but important, matter: what’s so admirable about a woman who “does not need a man” (or vice versa)? Interdependence is a defining feature of every social species. Even autistic people need other people. Everyone needs to be needed. Those who don’t feel needed, whether by other individuals or by society as a whole, are in big trouble. And we all pay the price in one way or another.
Just as men have in the past behaved badly and got away with it because the women can’t prove the fact adequately to bring them to book so now there seems to be a compensating movement to allow women to behave badly by libellous accusations against men without repercussions. When men don’t go along with it and attempt to challenge the facts as happened with Amber Herd and in this Stephen Elliott case the outrage seems to be directed against men for challenging the narrative and requiring the accusations be proved.
It seems to be all part of the woke contempt for provable facts. Allegations can be thrown by a member of the victim class that even when demonstrably false do little to diminish the force of the accusations on the grounds that they are the victim’s truth. Weird behaviour can be elided into rape or speculation about skin colour into racism and that is fine if it is made against one of the supposed privileged class.
“Just as men have in the past behaved badly and got away with it ”
What was this bad behaviour that we keep reading about? Dying by the millions in war after war, while the women stated safe in their homes? Working in brutal, unsafe industries or occupations to feed and house their families? Its interesting how women, while going on and on about awful men, are not very keen on any of those perks of the patriarchy – not very keen on extending conscription to women, being breadwinners or working in truck transport or oil rigs, are they?
And it’s also worth noting that most of the reasons women are safer than 5000 years back, is due to men. Men invented the technologies that improved female health outcomes and reduced the burden of household work, men introduced laws criminalising violence against women and formed the police forces that enforced those laws.
The funniest thing here? The women whining about unfounded metoo allegations actually rely on male CEOs and leaders to believe their hysterics and throw innocent men under the bus with no evidence. After all, if you #believe all women#, as you supposedly should (**) men control the world.
** Unless it’s an allegation against a Democrat presidential candidate, of course
That was a very defensive reply, that hints at insecurity on your part to my eyes.
I thought it was obvious what behaviour the poster was referring to, and to pretend it never happened simply because men have had it worse in other aspects of life seems slightly pathetic
Quite agree.
“…and to pretend it never happened simply because men have had it worse in other aspects of life seems slightly pathetic”
You’re missing the important point that #meToo’s defence against the the charge that it should be held accountable is based on the wider ideology of opposing patriarchal oppression. It is in other words a political position, and that means that Samir’s comment is wholly defensible, and really can’t be criticised on the basis you’re attempting.
Of course I can criticise it. He’s implying that the original post about men abusing their position is wrong because men had it hard in the past. Most people who are slightly more nuanced can see that yes some men did have it hard in the past, and that some men also abused their power in their treatment of women. I’m quite capable of believing that the way metoo essentially condemned men as guilty simply by an accusation is morally wrong, but that also some men are dangerous sexual predators.
That is true. And some women – actually more than a few – are dangerous sexual liars.
You lost your point the second you said pathetic. I think your blinkered mind can’t fathom what he was saying. I pity your intellectual limitations.
Stop it. You’re no nickel psychiatrist.
He’s right on the money. If they read a little history, the Pound Me, Too (#MeToo) founders would have realized that women’s proclivity to falsely accuse men has been understood and accounted-for for millennia. Although probably not a good example, Islam’s weighting of a woman’s testimony half that of a man’s is not just by accident.
Most of what you say I would not disagree with as is usually the case when you post.
However, I did think it clear that the bad behaviour by men complained of was in the context of the article about rape and sexual assault and there can be no doubt that many men have got away with these because there was insufficient corroboration beyond the woman’s word to result in a conviction or even for the claim to proceed to Court. That is inevitable so long as we require (as we should) that a jury is satisfied that such an assault took place as sex is something that is normally mutually sought and enjoyed and some additional evidence would rightly be required to establish that this was not the case beyond the mere assertion of the supposed victim.
In this sense your comments do not appear to be germane to or in refutation of the sentence you quote.
Despite the difficulty that women often find themselves in proving that they have been sexually assaulted to the satisfaction of a jury, the establishment of an Internet forum for women to make unsupported allegations that are not subject to proper scrutiny but which can result in social and professional ostracism of the man is a throughly undesirable development. It is entirely right that men should have recourse to the law to clear their names of any such false charges and the idea that women should be shielded from this by angry denunciation is a piece of woke absurdity.
This is the inevitable conclusion of identity politics. The casual nature of metoo to apply broad brush allegations against men with seemingly no requirement for evidence using patriarchy theory as its underlying thesis will naturally result in that kind of response.
The emergent consequence is inevitable division.
It is worse than hat, Andrew. No sane man considers approaching a woman these days, and that alone will bring a sad end (in reproductive terms) to the shit-show of unaccountability masked as “feminism”. Let’s hope that other cultures around the world (the ones escaping this suicidal drive) will see it for what it is.
I never refer to feminism without the qualifier, “toxic.”
The problem is that metoo and it’s supporters have zero interest in sexual assault in the conventional sense – involving physical or mental coercion or grooming of young girls. If anything, the most vociferous female supporters of this movement coincide with those who do their best to defend the grooming gangs or refuse to pinpoint high crime rates against women by “victim groups” in Detroit or Chicago.
So which rapes are we talking about, where as you say “many men have got away” and is the focus for metoo?
Well, consider the following cases of “rape” where the rapist used to “get away”:
– Victim willingly goes to a party, gets drunk, sleeps willingly with someone equally drunk and decides to regret the next morning
– Victim sleeps with a film producer, or CEO, goes around freely with the “rapist” in exchange for career benefits and then discovers was “raped” a few years later.
– Victim sleeps with or exchanges naughty text messages with college professor, continues sleeping and communicating normally with the prof for months – before discovering years later it was “rape”
– Victim in an army unit beats up other soldiers in a rage, and when about to be punished recalls being “raped” on a night when multiple other soldiers were sleeping in the same tent.
All of the above were real or close to real incidents of “rape”.
Here is the catch though.
Imagine all of those “victims” were white males.
What do you think would happen if and when they came forward with their stories of “rape”?
The identitareans in general have refined hypocrisy and double standards to god-like levels.
It’s hardly surprising when the underlying ideology is glued together by contradictions.
The same as happens when the victims are women, no matter their colour?
Unfortunately, the idea that ‘sex is something that is normally mutually sought and enjoyed’ is very much confined to the beliefs and practices of a small section of both time and culture. Outside our little bubble, sex has always been, and still is, regarded as the right of men and the lot of women, a social order predicated on the generally superior physical strength of men.
That being the case, it is a tragedy to see dishonest women choosing to destroy a man’s reputation and life with blatant disregard for what is factually true.
Utter rot! In which century do you believe that men have had it so much harder than women?
Bad behaviour is bad behaviour. Rape is rape. False allegations are false allegations. But a whine like this is about trying to position oneself as a member of a victim class. You too? Really?
Victim’s occupation: Victim
Apparently you can now be “accused” of offering an unsolicited invitation to come to your home. How about an unsolicited invitation to have a drink, or to go out for dinner? I’m amazed that people manage to arrange dates at all these days.
That’s exactly what I thought. Invitations are nearly always unsolicited, but importantly, invitations can always be refused. I suppose that if a person keeps inviting you and you’ve made clear that you want nothing to do with that person then it borders on harassment, but this didn’t seem to be the scenario being described.
Most marriages have started with some unsolicited invitation from the man.
I suppose woke men are now expected to sit demurely casting brief shy glances at the objects of their affection hoping they might be noticed and that the empowered woman deign to make some unsolicited suggestion that could lead to a sexual encounter after which they should sit by the phone hoping to be called if their performance was adequate.
No wonder there are apparently a lot of incels if unsolicited invitations are classified as equivalent to sexual assault.
Young men ought to know by now that many women are “woke in the streets, gender roles in the sheets” to coin a phrase. This is because women follow the woke rules for social protection and professional advancement. But of course women actually want men to be rebellious and objective. They want to be led away from that all that girlish subjectivity and conformity. In short women, even those who work in media, academia or non-profits, still want a man to be a man. So a man who stands up to woke rules and fantasies will be recognized at once to be masculine and, therefore, attractive.
Meanwhile other men, especially the young and inexperienced, being fearful of the obvious consequences of confronting female subjectivity, such as social ostracism or professional cancellation, do as you say and to a greater or lesser degree become “incels.” Or many calculate that it’s just not worth the trouble to demonstrate masculinity for women who have no idea what that is and what it’s worth. After all children are taught that history is nothing more than a series of oppressions caused by straight white men.
Other men recognize subjective woke spaces as fertile ground for indulging their deviant behavior among naive if not brainwashed women, spaces I might add where there simply aren’t any masculine men around who would otherwise put a stop to the woke man’s escapades.
Men in leadership roles elsewhere, who are more likely to be targets of a MeToo plot, than to be rapists, long ago decided not to meet alone with women in the workplace and so on. Behavior which of course women deride, as it negates one of their strategies.
Why is it men think they know what women want? Do any of you actually ask a woman what she wants rather than surmising? When we, my other half and I, got together 37 years ago, it was by having conversations about all sorts of things including liking other people, sex and what boundaries we both had. It must have worked as we are still together. Maybe if more people had these discussions/conversations, more couples would get together and stay together?
Ever heard of lying?
When Brett Kavanaugh was accused of running a college rape gang, a local radio guy was all in, echoing the accusations as indisputable. I argued that, aside from being ludicrously implausible, there was zero evidence. The radio guy said that, as the father of three daughters, he was compelled to “believe all women”, the catch phrase of the day. I said “So, if you gave one of your daughter’s friends a ride home after a sleepover and she then publicly accused you of groping her, should everyone, including your employer, believe her?” He stopped talking to me after that.
Is there a Shtty Media Woman equivalent? Thought not.
Women being raped in Ukraine and brave women being shot and beaten up by mad mullahs in Iran.
Meantime, white western feminists fulminate about micro-aggressions, bad sex regret, and manspreading on the tube.
Am I missing something? Don’t black western feminists fulminate about the same things? I thought black women were supposed to be particularly exercised by micro-aggressions.
It doesn’t matter. Just as it doesn’t matter that women can’t have penises, or that George Floyd wasn’t murdered, or that there’s no such thing as ‘free movement of labour’, or that you can’t feed five thousand people with five loaves and two fishes. These are Symbolic Truths. The Age of Enlightenment is over.
Got that?
Do people often solicit invitations? What a bizarre phrase.
“Illuminated here is the fundamental tension at the heart of MeToo: it is very difficult to demand that sexual assault be taken seriously, but simultaneously insist that false allegations thereof are no big deal.”
It really says something that even nowadays, in this supposedly kinder, gentler world we’re constantly told we inhabit, that this actually needs to be explained.
False allegations are a massive big deal; not only for the men falsely accused, but for any woman who was actually assaulted, because it puts into the jury’s mind that false accusations are common. Anyone who thinks differently needs to explain to me, in words of one syllable, why it is not harmful.
It is rather bizarre.
And one more point to the two you have already made is this: were the allegations not harmful, they wouldn’t be made due to them not accomplishing anything.
Whereas I do feel for those women who have never been able to get any justice for sexual harassment in the past, this type of behaviour is not acceptable. These are un-proven accusations which can destroy a man’s life, maybe he is guilty, who knows? It also gives a forum for deliberately false allegations by anyone with a grudge e.g. an angry ex-wife. It doesn’t even need to be a woman; it could be a business rival or cuckolded husband. If someone has been assaulted the only way forward is to report it to the proper authorities. It can always be difficult, often it is a “he said she said” situation, but there is no other fair way that I can see. Perhaps we should think about simply ensuring that we are not alone with a member of the opposite sex, that way women are not assaulted and men not falsely accused – back to chaperons.
I do find it a little strange that this guy shares information about his sex life with women; I wouldn’t do so with a man (I probably wouldn’t with a woman, either) no matter how friendly I was with him. But perhaps I just old-fashioned that way, and this is acceptable behaviour nowadays.
Could everybody *PLEASE* stop saying ‘sexual assault’ when they clearly mean ‘rape’?
By law, ‘sexual assault’ means everything down to an unwanted pat on the bum (see here) , and is *not* in any way a serious crime. The confusion is often used as, effectively, a feminist argument. Since sexual assault is quite common (true), and rape is very serious (true), confusing the two gives a false impression that rape is much more common than it really is.
Thank you Kat Rosenfield for another superb article: well written, nuanced thought and tackling a difficult subject.
This brings to mind the saying that women act on feelings, not facts.
Genuine rape victims suffer because too many women lie about rape.
The Believe All Women movement suffers because women lie about rape.
Women are too eager for vengeance and too committed to misandry.
Maybe some nuance? ‘Some women’ is not the same as ‘women’.
Accusing all women of misandry might risk you being accused of misogyny.
This story makes me think of the problem of ‘revenge porn’ – some women seem to be using this ‘list’ in the same spirit as some angry men are sharing intimate images of ex partners.
Stephen Elliott and Jacob Appelbaum have a lot in common w/ Mr. Cap’n Jack Sparrow.
Details on Appelbaum’s situation.
So this guy talks about sex right out of the gate. OK, whatever.
And if I ran into a woman who did the same, I would run away after the first couple minutes of meeting her. Just a little too loopy for my taste and, frankly, a waste of my time; thank you very much.
I think my wife had (has) it right: she does not need a man and so got a half decent one. And did not have to “kiss too many frogs” along the way either.
And the same sort of thing held true for me: I knew how to masturbate to fulfill a young man’s natural urges and so was just as happy to head home if I ran into a nut bar or a sane women who just wasn’t into me.
Maybe I am missing something, but it doesn’t seem all that complicated.
“So this guy talks about sex right out of the gate. OK, whatever.”
“I knew how to masturbate”
Missing something?
On a related, but important, matter: what’s so admirable about a woman who “does not need a man” (or vice versa)? Interdependence is a defining feature of every social species. Even autistic people need other people. Everyone needs to be needed. Those who don’t feel needed, whether by other individuals or by society as a whole, are in big trouble. And we all pay the price in one way or another.