Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old 05-24-2020, 04:24 PM
Ann Hedonia's Avatar
Ann Hedonia is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 4,137
I will go on the record as saying I don’t think Ive ever had an appreciable fear of sexual violence and I wouldn’t change my habits at all if all men had a 9PM curfew. Except habits that involve socializing with men outside after 9PM, of course.

I am cautious at times and careful with my words and body language around men I don’t know well, but that’s because I’m annoyed by men that read sexual signals into really innocuous stuff. Mentioning -while doing construction work on a hot day, even - that you can’t wait to get home and shower. Inadvertently using a phrase like “go down” in an awkward way that can be stretched into double entendre. Guys almost always latch onto that stuff, I can see it happen.

But what I’m trying to avoid is discomfort and awkward situations, not sexual violence. I’m racking my brain and thumbing through my history of interactions with men, and I can’t think of one time I felt in fear of sexual violence. I can think of times I should’ve been - I was reckless in my youth and would sometimes go alone with guys I didn’t know to remote locations, the situations usually involved drugs. But nothing ever happened and I didn’t feel threatened at the time.

This is just my experience, though. I understand that everyone is different.

Last edited by Ann Hedonia; 05-24-2020 at 04:27 PM.
  #52  
Old 05-24-2020, 06:08 PM
Larry Borgia's Avatar
Larry Borgia is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Washington DC
Posts: 11,097
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whack-a-Mole View Post
I do not know what this means.



I do not know what this means.




On what authority is the claim I am responding to made?




Super anecdote.
I'm sorry, but I'm having a hard time taking this seriously. You aren't dumb or naive, and I think you've been on the planet for more than thirty years. I just can't believe you are that ignorant of the ways women's experience on the street, in bars and restaurants, on dates and elsewhere differs from men's. I just don't believe it.

Back in the day I was cat-called by (I presume) gay guys a couple of times, and once I had a dude grab my crotch. These were rare singular events that I remember to this day. Women have to put up with this shit all day every day.

I can put my drink down on the bar, go to the bathroom, stop to talk to someone, return to my drink and have full confidence it hasn't been tampered with by some creep.

I've been on bad dates. Sometimes it was my fault, sometimes the other person's, But I've never been afraid for my safety. (Yes I am aware that men can be raped, but it's just never been a concern for me.)

I was walking a petite pretty woman home one night and started to take a short cut. She said "Oh yeah, I forgot guys can do this." This is the reality of the world. Surely you are aware of this.

I'm not a rapist. I would never do that. But if a random woman on the street sees me, She doesn't know that. So I will do what I can to make her feel comfortable and not take offence if she takes precautions.
  #53  
Old 05-24-2020, 08:43 PM
you with the face is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Laurel, MD
Posts: 12,719
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ulfreida View Post
The sentence is misleading. If you read the linked article, it was about what happened when women in the UK were asked, "what would you do if men had a nine p.m. curfew?"

Some common answers included go for a walk, go grocery shopping during less crowded hours, go for a run with earbuds in, walk in the forest at night, work late and walk home.

There's your women terrorists from hell, right there.

No surprise, these answers managed to enrage a lot of men.
After mulling these recent exchanges over for the last few hours, what is bothering me is that I don’t see men like Whack-a-Mole piping up in threads like this one, where men expressed the opinion that women need to do more to protect themselves from would-be rapists. The thread revealed a fundamental lack of caring and/or understanding that women are made fearful of men because the world doesn’t quit issuing them warnings, admonishments, and lectures about playing life safe. And when they do get victimized, the fear intensifies because not only do they have the trauma to live with but also the shame of letting oneself become a victim.

Guys concerned about being judged by as potential rapists should be the first in line arguing for a society that doesn’t treat the curtailment of women’s freedoms as a solution to male criminality. Rather than being frustrated with women for being wary, they should ask themselves where that fear is coming from.

I’ve rejected a lot of the fear-mongering messaging aimed at women. I don’t consider myself a particularly brave person, but very few things described in this article strike me as scary (Spoiler alert: women are more likely to be fearful of certain situations than men). But I have had to deal with judgement when I dared to do things “women shouldn’t do”, like go out alone at night or travel abroad by myself. So something is certainly whack with all of this. The wackness doesn’t seem to be coming from women, though.
  #54  
Old 05-25-2020, 02:22 AM
Guinastasia's Avatar
Guinastasia is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 53,209
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whack-a-Mole View Post
So you would give the same caution when meeting unknown women?
Me personally? Generally, I'm not really afraid of strange men, or women, necessarily, unless they give off a "creepy vibe". (And if you don't know what that is, I can't help you. It's one of those, you know it when you see it type of things) And in reality, most people are assaulted by someone they know.


I was simply relating how someone might feel. Because of our society, because of what we hear on the news, because of the image of "rapist jumping out of the bushes at night", etc. It might not be accurate, or rational, but that's where it comes from.

Part of the problem is how women are always told, "don't go out alone at night", "don't go around in strange neighborhoods", "don't get drunk in public," etc. And if a woman IS raped, it will be assumed she WAS doing one of those things. "What was she wearing? Why was she talking to that strange man -- shouldn't she have been with friends?"

So if you try and be cautious around people, you're rude, if you don't, you're risking yourself. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
  #55  
Old 05-25-2020, 02:33 AM
AHunter3's Avatar
AHunter3 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: NY (Manhattan) NY USA
Posts: 21,241
I think a lot of us male heterosexual folk fantasize about how nice things would be if you female folks weren't on edge about us, didn't feel like you had to worry about us, didn't have to be defensive or proactively wary and so forth.

I suppose that's an incredibly self-immersed and self-centered way to approach the matter, but I think that, yeah, we do that.

A few of us end up feeling like that, all by itself, is something so desirable that we'd opt to shut down the patriarchy to make that possible. It's what makes us start really listening and caring about what women have to go through.

Is it horrible if it's coming from a selfish standpoint? Do you prefer the chivalrous version?
  #56  
Old 05-25-2020, 07:04 AM
Ulfreida is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: pangolandia
Posts: 4,217
Quote:
Originally Posted by AHunter3 View Post
I think a lot of us male heterosexual folk fantasize about how nice things would be if you female folks weren't on edge about us, didn't feel like you had to worry about us, didn't have to be defensive or proactively wary and so forth.

I suppose that's an incredibly self-immersed and self-centered way to approach the matter, but I think that, yeah, we do that.

A few of us end up feeling like that, all by itself, is something so desirable that we'd opt to shut down the patriarchy to make that possible. It's what makes us start really listening and caring about what women have to go through.

Is it horrible if it's coming from a selfish standpoint? Do you prefer the chivalrous version?
You're asking, which is better, wanting women to relax around men, without men changing anything that they do, because it would make men feel better about themselves, or wanting women to accept being protected by men from men, like it's always been?

Um, not really seeing either of these as interesting choices, if that's what you mean.
  #57  
Old 05-25-2020, 07:50 AM
you with the face is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Laurel, MD
Posts: 12,719
Quote:
Originally Posted by AHunter3 View Post
I think a lot of us male heterosexual folk fantasize about how nice things would be if you female folks weren't on edge about us, didn't feel like you had to worry about us, didn't have to be defensive or proactively wary and so forth.

I suppose that's an incredibly self-immersed and self-centered way to approach the matter, but I think that, yeah, we do that.

A few of us end up feeling like that, all by itself, is something so desirable that we'd opt to shut down the patriarchy to make that possible. It's what makes us start really listening and caring about what women have to go through.

Is it horrible if it's coming from a selfish standpoint? Do you prefer the chivalrous version?
I’m sure there are some men who want patriarchy to end because freeing women from sex-based oppression is a good unto itself. Not because it increases their access to sex, and not because of chilvary (which is really nothing but benign paternalism). But because of empathy.
  #58  
Old 05-25-2020, 08:00 AM
AHunter3's Avatar
AHunter3 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: NY (Manhattan) NY USA
Posts: 21,241
No, neither of those things.

Assume that by 'shut down the patriarchy', changes in men's actual behavior is necessary and being embraced by the proponents thereof.

Let's try again.

A few us want the outcome of sexual equality (including but not limited to safety from sexually intrusive conduct) for our own selfish reasons, i.e., we like the outcome. That means we wish it for selfish reasons.

ETA: replying to Ulfrieda

Last edited by AHunter3; 05-25-2020 at 08:01 AM.
  #59  
Old 05-25-2020, 08:58 AM
Ulfreida is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: pangolandia
Posts: 4,217
Quote:
Originally Posted by AHunter3 View Post
No, neither of those things.

Assume that by 'shut down the patriarchy', changes in men's actual behavior is necessary and being embraced by the proponents thereof.

Let's try again.

A few us want the outcome of sexual equality (including but not limited to safety from sexually intrusive conduct) for our own selfish reasons, i.e., we like the outcome. That means we wish it for selfish reasons.

ETA: replying to Ulfrieda
Oh, okay. What do you think the outcome would be, the one that you like?
  #60  
Old 05-25-2020, 09:15 AM
AHunter3's Avatar
AHunter3 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: NY (Manhattan) NY USA
Posts: 21,241
That women should be able to go or be anywhere safely (or at least that they're no less safe than anyone else), and not exposed to sexually intrusive conduct (or, again, that it's not something that women get subjected to disproportionately); that women have equal access to resources and opportunity, not blocked by either policy or attitudes.

Hence that women are engaging in sexual interaction only on their own terms, not because they're coerced or pressured into it and not because they've been put in a position where they need to trade sexual access for resources or safety or whatever.


ETA: And also hence, that then women would not be on edge and wary of us, etc, as I said.

Last edited by AHunter3; 05-25-2020 at 09:17 AM.
  #61  
Old 05-25-2020, 09:53 AM
you with the face is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Laurel, MD
Posts: 12,719
Quote:
Originally Posted by AHunter3 View Post
That women should be able to go or be anywhere safely (or at least that they're no less safe than anyone else), and not exposed to sexually intrusive conduct (or, again, that it's not something that women get subjected to disproportionately); that women have equal access to resources and opportunity, not blocked by either policy or attitudes.

Hence that women are engaging in sexual interaction only on their own terms, not because they're coerced or pressured into it and not because they've been put in a position where they need to trade sexual access for resources or safety or whatever.


ETA: And also hence, that then women would not be on edge and wary of us, etc, as I said.
The above doesn’t sound selfish at all, so what is it about this outcome that strikes you as self-serving to men?

Gonna go out on a limb and speculate that you think sexual equality means that men will get to experience the kind of sexual objectification you yearn for. I don’t think this is a given.

Last edited by you with the face; 05-25-2020 at 09:53 AM.
  #62  
Old 05-25-2020, 10:45 AM
thorny locust's Avatar
thorny locust is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: Upstate New York
Posts: 2,392
I think what AHunter3 is positing may be something that occured to me quite a while ago:

If women weren't afraid that men might hurt them, then some women (not all) would be more willing to have casual sex.

Imagine a world in which one could agree to go to a private place with a stranger or casual acquaintance and have sex with them, in the absolute or near-absolute certainty that the person would not only not do you any physical harm, but would not insist, once they got you alone, in having sex in some fashion that you didn't like, or in continuing after you wanted to stop, or in acting afterwards as if they had some sort of claim on you; and also in the certainty that they wouldn't afterwards mock you to their friends or to yours. [ETA: and of course in the certainty that they wouldn't kill you.]

I think that in that world heterosexual men would indeed find it easier to get laid. Still not guaranteed, of course, because at any given time a lot of people don't want to have sex right then; for any given person not every other person wants to have sex with that particular person; some don't want to have sex at all; and some will have the desire but have other reasons not to act on it. But easier, because one of the reasons not to agree to sex -- the fear of being deliberately harmed -- would have disappeared.



Quote:
Originally Posted by you with the face View Post
After mulling these recent exchanges over for the last few hours, what is bothering me is that I don’t see men like Whack-a-Mole piping up in threads like this one, where men expressed the opinion that women need to do more to protect themselves from would-be rapists. .
I was thinking about that too. The culture we live in is full, absolutely full, of people (of any gender) giving women advice on how to avoid being raped. We not only swim in a sea of the possibility of rape, we also swim in a sea of advice on the subject, starting when we're small children. And while I've certainly seen/heard people (most of them women) object to this advice on the grounds that much of it's bad advice that won't work, on the grounds that much of it assumes that only strangers can be dangerous and advice constructed on this theory may actually increase risk, on the grounds that much of it is unreasonably constricting, and on the grounds that it's unfair to expect women to do the work of preventing rapes committed by men: I don't think I've ever seen anybody object on the grounds that there's nothing to worry about anyway. It's always flat out assumed that of course women need to be worried about the possibility of rape.

Last edited by thorny locust; 05-25-2020 at 10:48 AM.
  #63  
Old 05-25-2020, 11:23 AM
MichaelEmouse's Avatar
MichaelEmouse is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 7,589
Quote:
Originally Posted by thorny locust View Post
If women weren't afraid that men might hurt them, then some women (not all) would be more willing to have casual sex.

Imagine a world in which one could agree to go to a private place with a stranger or casual acquaintance and have sex with them, in the absolute or near-absolute certainty that the person would not only not do you any physical harm, but would not insist, once they got you alone, in having sex in some fashion that you didn't like, or in continuing after you wanted to stop, or in acting afterwards as if they had some sort of claim on you; and also in the certainty that they wouldn't afterwards mock you to their friends or to yours. [ETA: and of course in the certainty that they wouldn't kill you.]
So, this would mean that the #1 reason for reticence to have casual sex comes from fear of being physically hurt, subjugated or mocked?

What would be reasons #2 and #3?

Last edited by MichaelEmouse; 05-25-2020 at 11:23 AM.
  #64  
Old 05-25-2020, 11:27 AM
SmartAleq's Avatar
SmartAleq is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: PDXLNT
Posts: 5,848
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelEmouse View Post
So, this would mean that the #1 reason for reticence to have casual sex comes from fear of being physically hurt, subjugated or mocked?

What would be reasons #2 and #3?
In an exclusive relationship? Doesn't ever want to have sex with a man? Is asexual? Doesn't like casual sex because it tends to be unsatisfying? Has issues with birth control that make it difficult to navigate proper contraception on a casual encounter? There's no end of reasons why a person would not engage in casual sex. Y'know, like all the ones there are right now, minus the fear factor.
  #65  
Old 05-25-2020, 11:33 AM
Ulfreida is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: pangolandia
Posts: 4,217
Quote:
Originally Posted by AHunter3 View Post
That women should be able to go or be anywhere safely (or at least that they're no less safe than anyone else), and not exposed to sexually intrusive conduct (or, again, that it's not something that women get subjected to disproportionately); that women have equal access to resources and opportunity, not blocked by either policy or attitudes.

Hence that women are engaging in sexual interaction only on their own terms, not because they're coerced or pressured into it and not because they've been put in a position where they need to trade sexual access for resources or safety or whatever.


ETA: And also hence, that then women would not be on edge and wary of us, etc, as I said.
It seems very laudable ... although I think that for women to be treated in an egalitarian way, truly an enormous shift in American culture would have to happen. "Hidden" work like housework and childcare would either have to be compensated in wages or in some other way. Men would have to start being responsible for many tasks that now are only, or mostly, required of women. Men would have to stop talking and start listening. I don't know how that would happen.

I think the whole idea of free-market capitalism with its built-in disinterest in anything which supports communities over profits, like easy affordable childcare for all, just as an example, would have to be re-examined. Or raping land for profit and leaving it poisoned and dead. Or destroying communities and cultures because they stand in the way of profit. These things are all linked to patriarchy, and far more eloquent people than I have explicated how this is so.

There can be no true equality of women without equality for everyone. Without a living wage for everyone. Without equal rights for everyone.

So, a high bar.
  #66  
Old 05-25-2020, 11:37 AM
thorny locust's Avatar
thorny locust is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: Upstate New York
Posts: 2,392
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelEmouse View Post
So, this would mean that the #1 reason for reticence to have casual sex comes from fear of being physically hurt, subjugated or mocked?
No. It would mean that one of the reasons is that fear. It wouldn't mean that that is the number one reason.

I don't know what the ranking would be; there are lots of possible reasons.

ETA: if we could get rid of that fear, we might find out what percentage of that reluctance is due to it. I agree that doing so would be quite a heavy lift.

Last edited by thorny locust; 05-25-2020 at 11:40 AM.
  #67  
Old 05-25-2020, 12:19 PM
you with the face is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Laurel, MD
Posts: 12,719
Quote:
Originally Posted by thorny locust View Post
I think what AHunter3 is positing may be something that occured to me quite a while ago:

If women weren't afraid that men might hurt them, then some women (not all) would be more willing to have casual sex.
I don’t think the fear of men is the main thing that keeps women from seeking casual sex. Slut shaming and the belief that good men devalue women who “give it up” too freely are factors much more at work.

Quote:
I think that in that world heterosexual men would indeed find it easier to get laid.
I agree. But casual sex is not the same thing as sexual objectification, at least to me. Having carefree, no strings attached sex with a FWB doesn’t mean seeing and treating them as just an assembly of sex characteristics that exist to get you off. That’s what comes to mind when I think of sexual objectification.

Quote:
And while I've certainly seen/heard people (most of them women) object to this advice on the grounds that much of it's bad advice that won't work, on the grounds that much of it assumes that only strangers can be dangerous and advice constructed on this theory may actually increase risk, on the grounds that much of it is unreasonably constricting, and on the grounds that it's unfair to expect women to do the work of preventing rapes committed by men: I don't think I've ever seen anybody object on the grounds that there's nothing to worry about anyway. It's always flat out assumed that of course women need to be worried about the possibility of rape.
Exactly, and I rarely see men showing an appreciation for how all this advice and sermonizing impacts regular guys who want baggage-free fun with women. Women are told that it’s bad idea to party alone and get drunk around strange men? A guy will hear this and be okay with it. Why wouldn’t he? He’s not having his behavior controlled and furthermore, he doesn’t see himself in that population of people called “strange men”. “Strange men” are all those other dudes. So when a woman—after 20 plus years of being told stuff like this—says she’s cautious around men because of the potential harm they may pose, suddenly that’s when the indignant outrage comes out. Not when she’s getting pounded in the head with a million and one tips to stay safe from rapists.
  #68  
Old 05-25-2020, 01:07 PM
Ulfreida is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: pangolandia
Posts: 4,217
There is plenty of evidence that women as a group simply are not as interested in casual sex as men as a group are, no matter how safe or shame-free it might be. One piece of that evidence is in the vastly different sexual behavior of lesbians and gay men. When women are truly free to engage in casual sex, they mostly don't. The reverse is true of men.

So if one of your big goals in ending patriarchy is to have considerably more sex without emotional attachment, it may not work out for you as well as you think.
  #69  
Old 05-25-2020, 01:56 PM
Trinopus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 22,929
The "selfish" aspect would never even have occurred to me, and now it's been said, I'm just not interested in it. When I meet someone who's right for me, and I'm right for her, we overcome fear by gradual familiarization. It might slow down the initial stages of dating a little, because, yes, there is a curb or barrier because of social fear.

But since one of the best ways men and women meet is by being introduced by mutual friends, and that helps a lot in overcoming fear.

For me, I'll just paraphrase Abraham Lincoln: "As I would not be afraid, so I would not be fearsome."
  #70  
Old 05-25-2020, 02:51 PM
thorny locust's Avatar
thorny locust is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: Upstate New York
Posts: 2,392
Quote:
Originally Posted by you with the face View Post
I agree. But casual sex is not the same thing as sexual objectification, at least to me. Having carefree, no strings attached sex with a FWB doesn’t mean seeing and treating them as just an assembly of sex characteristics that exist to get you off. That’s what comes to mind when I think of sexual objectification. .
I agree with that. The thread has drifted somewhat.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ulfreida View Post
There is plenty of evidence that women as a group simply are not as interested in casual sex as men as a group are, no matter how safe or shame-free it might be.
This is very likely true on average; but there are certainly some women who are interested in casual sex. Some of them are only interested in it for a while, possibly for a few years after they start having sex, but become only interested in sex within serious relationships when they get older; some remain interested in it, or become interested in it when they get older.

This is one of many things in which if you look at the averages, you see differences; but there are nevertheless significant numbers of people who don't fit the pattern.
  #71  
Old 05-25-2020, 03:37 PM
AHunter3's Avatar
AHunter3 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: NY (Manhattan) NY USA
Posts: 21,241
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ulfrieda
There is plenty of evidence that women as a group simply are not as interested in casual sex as men as a group are, no matter how safe or shame-free it might be. One piece of that evidence is in the vastly different sexual behavior of lesbians and gay men. When women are truly free to engage in casual sex, they mostly don't. The reverse is true of men.

So if one of your big goals in ending patriarchy is to have considerably more sex without emotional attachment, it may not work out for you as well as you think.
Can't speak for other guys but I'm not interested in more sex without emotional attachment. I'm interested in being in a world where women's behavioral motivations for their sexual behavior is pretty purely their own sexuality and not all the distortions imposed by their social position within patriarchy. I'm interested in sex on a more mutual basis, but I've always been totallly up for the emotional attachment part

Last edited by AHunter3; 05-25-2020 at 03:38 PM. Reason: Added Ulfrieda's quote since other folks came in since then
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:07 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017