There is no proof after 20, 30 or 40 years that some Catholic priests raped children, either. But almost everyone agrees that some Catholic priests did.
There is no such thing as the patriarchy and no such thing as rape culture.
Men live on average 7-8? Years Less than women. 95% of prisoners in jail are men. It is overwhelmingly men who work the extreme, dangerous, backbreaking and undesirable jobs like coal mining or working the pipes on oil rigs. When there is war, it is overwhelmingly the men who get sent off to die. Women make and nurture new life, which is the be all and all of human existence.
The patriarchy is a myth.
As for rape culture? The urge to procreate is an instinctual and biological imperative, not a cultural one. Many animals rape each other. The effect of culture and civilization is to reduce acts of sexual violence not increase them. The fact that this is so is evidenced by events such as anarchy, natural disaster or other break downs of society and law and order in which instances of rape increase dramatically as an immediate consequence.
One of the great commonalities of authoritarian regimes and particularly leftist and socialist ones is that they attempt to gain and control their authority by coercing people into accepting, stating and sometimes believing ridiculous propositions that are demonstrably untrue. One is not allowed to think for themselves. They can do this because humans have a propensity to want to get along with each other that can be manipulated. As children most remember the practical joke where you get a group of friends who are in on it and one who is not. You say “two elephants were in a bathtub. One elephant looks at the other and says “no soap radio.” Than you and everybody else in on it start laughing uproariously. The person not in on it will almost inevitably join in. You can then tease that person by asking him they get it and they will usually assert they do.
Hating rape culture the tyrannical patriarchy seem like nice just attitudes to have and questioning either can result In wokeshaming to gain compliance but its just “no soap radio.”
There is actually a lot of proof. Confessions, witnesses, written records. Internal memos from archdioceses discussing it and moving to parishes to protect them and the Church.
You answered a question. It’s not quite the one I asked, which was a big picture one about what your vision of an admirable criminal justice system would look like. I asked this because I just keep hearing you tell me about things that are wrong. I want to know what right looks like and how it works from your perspective. This answer you’ve given is another discussion off things that you think are wrong that we should stop doing rather than things that are right.
Frankly, you tend to be forthright, so I may be asking the question badly, or you may not understand What I am asking, and it was wrong for me to badger or imply that you were dodging.
Since I’ve made an investment in asking the question, i’ll Commit the fallacy of sunken costs and try one more time.
You’ve asserted in my estimation that the justice system is mostly a tool of the powerful that serves the powerful and that it consistently fails victims. Based on this, I would expect that your solution is not just to tweak it hear or there (which your reply seems to indicate,) but that you envision a more revolutionary deep and sweeping change. If you cate to share, I would like to hear what that is, what it’s principles are, how it would work, why it would be better.
If not, i’ll Give up asking.
I understand where you’re coming from. When the extreme right uses labels like “socialist” and “gun grabber”, its easy to understand what they mean. The trouble with the extreme left is that they are always trying to be too clever by half and are never able to pick a label that anybody really comprehends. If people have to look up the definition of “patriarchy” & “rape culture” and then read an entire thesis paper with cites, you’ve lost your audience or any chance of convincing most people of your argument.
That said, do you reject the idea outright that, historically and at present, the majority of the world is a male dominated society and that rape victims are overwhelmingly female?
Those are two different questions. The first is untrue.
I assume the second is true.
So to be clear, you disagree that the majority of the world is a male dominated society; you assume it to be true that the majority of rape victims are female?
So to be clear, you disagree that the majority of the world is a male dominated society; you assume it to be true that the majority of rape victims are female?
The iffy proposition. Implied here, is that if I am really smart and I delve into it, there is actually something there.
I am. I have. There isn’t.
The literature on this is deconstructionist in style, and the conclusions, where there are any, and they follow logically, are dependent upon some pet theory, like all communication is coercion, or all relationships are based on power dynamics. Typically it’s some pessimistic unnuanced simplification.
It’s interesting how this thing cropped up. When the Marxist revolutionaries lost and retreated the humanities departments of the universities in the wake of McCarthyism, they encountered deconstructionists, who had designed the philosophy as a tool to analyze literature. The Marxist’s adopted it as a lens to look at society, infusing it with their tired and discredited ideology this breathing new life into it.
Most of the WokeBros don’t even understand that what they believe has been deliberately crafted and fed to them in order to start a Marxist revolution. The guys that did are no longer around, but it perpetuates itself like a meme, this basic framework of Marxist philosophy which is to divide a group into oppressed/oppressors by race sex class religion whatever, in order to break down the system and replace it with fair socialist one.
But it is total and complete bullshit. It makes Scientology look rational.
Yes. The latter seems so obvious that I haven’t bothered to study it. Once in a great while I get surprised by something like this where it turns out that what seemed self evidently true and obvious is actually wrong, so I am hedging.
But I would be very very surprised if it wasn’t true. I’me Essentially open to the idea that it isn’t if someone wants to argue it, and prove their case.
So my hedging is more a matter of philosophical stance than anything. I am virtually positive that women get raped a lot more than men.
Your understanding of these concepts seems to be greatly lacking. I’m not an expert, but I’d recommend starting here:
These are real concepts. Maybe you disagree with various aspects, but most of the above doesn’t actually address the real concepts. It’s a fact that men are in charge of most institutions, systems, governments, etc., in the world and in America. It’s a fact that women have less opportunity to achieve these leadership positions in the world and in America – unless you believe women are just naturally unsuited to leadership (which would open up a whole other kettle of fish), or naturally uninterested (ditto!), then the statistical lack of women at these high levels demonstrates that women have less opportunity to reach the top.
As for rape, it has nothing to do with procreation. We’re humans, not animals, and we have the capability to consciously control our actions. Rape culture seems obvious to me because I lived it – growing up, girls who had sex were “easy” or “sluts” (or similar), while boys who did were to be emulated and admired. Girls who dressed in a certain way or flirted were “teases” if they didn’t “put out”, and boys who successfully pressured/manipulated or even forced (as long as it didn’t involve injury or a weapon) a girl to provide sex were to be emulated and admired. “Good girls” would never be raped, except maybe by a stranger in the bushes, because “good girls” would never go to a boy’s apartment, or stay in his car, or french kiss him, etc… and if they were raped in such a circumstance, then they weren’t “good girls” – the boy was just doing what boys do. This was mostly unquestioned, and this was in the 80s and 90s. Most of the guys I knew in high school and college had similar experiences in similar environments. Maybe your upbringing was profoundly different. Would you at least agree that the environment/culture that I grew up with can fairly be described as “rape culture”?
Thank you for the links. I have read extensively on the subject, both sides, and thought it through all the way to the bottom. I feel very comfortable discussing it.
The concepts are real. That doesn’t Mean they are accurate or reflect in the real world.
That is a fact. You seem to think that this proof of a patriarchy. It’s not. You need to know why this is so.
Most NBA players are black. That does not mean that there is a Blackiarchy in the NBA.
Do you know why there are more men in charge of Fortune 500 companies than women?
It’s not controversial at all. The science was done in the 80s and 90s and is virtually undisputed in the psychological science. There are measurable dimensions of personality. Agreeableness, conscientiousness, and risk aversion. If you measure the sexes against these dimensions they virtually overlap, except at the extremes. At the extremes of the population, the least aggreeable are all men. The most extremes in terms of least aversion to risk are all men (these two are also the biggest indicators for being imprisoned which is why 95% of a people in prison are male.). The extremes of conscientiousness are all women.
CEOs and heads of government tend to be at or near the extremes for all three of these dimensions. At the extremes, men tend to have two out of three of these dimensions more than women.
Then too, is the question of choice. It’s a big sacrifice and you have to give up a lot to gain one of these positions. Women tend not to go that route as often as men.
Nope that’s not a clear fact. It might be true. It might not. Different studies say different things, and it’s changing. 56% of those seeking higher education are women currently. If you look at the Scandanavian phenomenon where they have worked very hard to create equality of opportunity it turns out that rather than homogenizing the population segregated even further. It’s an unexpected result. What did change was that women are growing to dominate the health care fields. Women just don’t tend to choose to go the CEO track as often as men. There is tons and tons of literature on this, but the idea that there are fewer CEOs than men because of a patriarchy is unsupported balderdash.
The fact that it exists is not proof of why it exists. It’s a dangerous route to go down unless you want to explain how the lack of female CEOs is a sign of the patriarchy but the overwhelming majority of the population of jails isn’t the sign of an oppressive matriarchy.
Nothing? Really? Are you sure? You might want to think about that one and walk it back.
The group animals includes the subset humans. My dog can do what you think is special an consciously control his actions, defer gratitude. I put a treat on his nose and he controls the desire to eat it until I tell him because he knows if he doesn’t he doesn’t get more.
And, in fact you may have it backwards. The current thinking among behaviorists and neurologists, elucidated magnificently by Stanford Neurologist Robert Sapoldky in his book Behave is that it is actually our instincts that are in control of our consciousness not the other way around.
No. Let’s pretend that I think what you described is accurate. I don’t but let’s pretend.
We know that rape is commonplace in the animal kingdom, and we know that civilization and culture have a damping effect on rape. We know this because when these things break down we get more rapes, not fewer.
What you describe is a negotiation of the levels of force and coercion that is acceptable to have sex, or rape, and what targets are acceptable this negotiation is imposed culturally. It’s effect is to restrain from just raping or fucking everything in sight (which is probably a pretty accurate description of the instinctual desires of adolescent boys.). What you are describing is actually a rape mitigation culture, not a rape culture.
You and your group are more restrained than they would be without those culturally imposed boundaries.
Culture, even the one you fancifully describe in stereotypical fashion, is like a vaccine against rape. Even if you have a very bad vaccine that only prevents 1% of an illness it is wrong to say that that vaccine causes the illness.
Similarly, the whole neomarxist concept of rape culture is founded on the premise that it is that culture that is causing the rapes and that there would be fewer if it didn’t exist. This is of course, hogwash.
This is not to say that we can’t all agree that culture needs to do a better job of mitigating rape, I.e. we need a better vaccine, but getting it backwards and thinking the culture causes the rape is very dangerous and foolhardy (as the anti-vaxxers are discovering.)
So why did the people who say rape culture is a thing get it wrong? Because getting it right is not important. The goal of these concepts is to show that society and culture and the current power dynamic are bad, so that they can be replaced with something new. The methodology is to divide people into groups, oppressor and oppressed so that everybody has a grudge against everybody else and is each other’s enemy… except for the people that subscribe to the new philosophy and agree with everything it says.
You, my friend, witting, or unwitting are one of these.
For the record, my experience in the 80s in NY, NJ and Louisiana was not quite the stereotypical cartoonish nightmare of adolescence run wild that you describe. Yes the boys talked shit and said terrible things, but the women were in charge. I realized this early, and played by their rules and did very well with them because of it. Anybody who tried to take liberties with a girl would have to face a mob of boys who would be more than happy to demonstrate their devotion by beating the shit out him for starters.
We all knew that the girls talked to each other, and nobody wanted to be labeled as a guy a girl could not trust. Receiving such a label would be a death sentence socially.
Anyway we’ve just begun to get started on the nonexistence of the patriarchy, so if you still have questions or are unconvinced, I’d be happy to discuss it further.
Bit, it is total. Complete. Indefensible. Bullshit.
You would have an easier time proving the existence of the Easter Bunny.
What you describe sounds like the bitter ravings of a bunch of incels.
Scylla, that is a ridiculous misapplication of statistics and you know it. Here, let me quote from a poster I’m pretty sure you respect to explain why:
Notice how Trump is the shark in your scenario? I like it.
We live in such different universes that meaningful engagement seems totally impossible. That’s about the least negative thing I can say for it; anything else would probably have to go in the Pit. Just utterly, obscenely, revolting.
I know rape culture is real because I’ve experienced it, indirectly – I was socialized into thinking that groping was not a big deal; cat-calling and sexual harassment were perfectly okay; etc. And then I was socialized into realizing how awful these things are, and how unsafe they make women feel. It wasn’t instinct that taught me, either – it was society and culture (i.e. rape culture – the only type of culture that could teach a young man that groping, cat-calling, and sexual harassment weren’t a big deal). And it was society and culture (specifically, feminist aspects of society and culture) that enlightened me as to how I was wrong.
I have two responses. First, hopefully you realize I was being tongue in cheek with the ‘billions of women Trump has not assaulted.”
Secondly and more importantly:
Oooohhhh. Very well-played. Touché. I might’ve recovered and gotten away with my self-respect, but the “Trump is the shark’ comment is a knockout punch. I am flat on the canvass.
Funny, lighthearted, devastating. One of the best posts ever.
(Note to self: do not fuck with CairoCarol.)
We are approximately the same age and this is entirely the opposite of my experiences. Could you describe the context in which you were socialized in such a manner?
I grew up with a reasonably rough and coarse crowd. I never thought groping was not a big deal. That, Harassing or cat calling earned you a fucking beating, or else somebody took you aside and did some serious explaining, with the codicil that they have been warned, and that there will not be another warning.
But if I believe your version of adolescence is accurate, than yes you learned to do those things from culture. They are less than rape. Culture imposed a stopping point short of rape. Did you not understand what I wrote in the previous post or were you to busy being righteously offended to think?
Even horribly sexist and primitive and brutal cultures place some limits on when it is ok to rape. In that they mitigate from what it would be if there were no restraints.
I am not arguing that any of those things are good, or should be allowed. Exactly the opposite, but is important to what they actually are and what they actually do. They don’t create sexual abuse. They place limits on it.
For example, you say you were taught groping was no big deal. By this, I assume you are saying that grabbing an unsuspecting women’s ass or breasts was no big deal.
When you did it, or somebody else did it, why did you do it? What roles did it play?
-
Was the person doing it for the benefit of the guys around him? Gain status?
-
Was the person making an indication of interest in the girl he groped in the hopes that she would respond positively? How did it go?
What was the motivation? What function did it serve?
…LOL.
The funniest parody post I’ve ever seen in Great Debates.
This is a parody post right?
Maybe you just ran with a bad crowd? I wasn’t “socialised” into doing any of that shit.