It’s weird that an anti-rape activist uses a word that comes from prison slang that originally referred to a guy who ‘let’ himself get raped, isn’t it?
In a similar vein, it’s surprising to me when progressives use the term “butthurt”. I always thought it was obvious that was an anal rape joke.
sigh She’s basically calling him a pussy. Okay?
It isn’t.
It isn’t? You sure?
But if he’s not understanding her level of consent, isn’t that just a roundabout way of saying she thinks he’d assault her?
Everyone interviewed for that article comes off pretty unpleasant. I do think there are a lot of very broken and unhappy people out there, and it does make sense that they’d look for a reason to be angry or perhaps justify pushing people away. I don’t think all anti-rape activists (or activists in general) are like that, but it makes sense that if you’re looking for someone who’s passionate enough about it to be interviewed for a magazine that you’d find some people who are a little off.
Let’s also keep in mind that these are college students. They’re barely past the stage where a “date” involves getting fingered on the couch in the basement while Mom is out walking the dog.
Well, I can’t speak for her of course, but I’d guess she would want him to comply with her standards (because that would show that he “gets it”) or not bother at all. She may not think he would assault her, but consent obviously means different things to them.
Um, ignorance fought? You used a lot of slang I don’t know, or knew slightly differently.
I would interpret “he ain’t shit about consent” as “he is unimportant in the context of consent, you can rape him with impunity.”, not “he might rape you”, which I assume she meant.
Re her opening statement
It’s not the rape issue so much as she seems genuinely socially retarded. She doesn’t get why a man given that insulting and threatening intro would not head for the hills.
Shodan said
Oddly enough both these personality types are often somewhat socially autistic. They might actually get along in some weird fashion.
He’s unimportant, yes, but because he doesn’t know any better and doesn’t want to know, to her. She had been previously assaulted, her threshold for consent was much different than his. To her, he is a fuckboy. His opinions were shit, and likewise he felt hers were shit. So if that was a matter they couldn’t see eye to eye on, she wanted nothing to do with him. He could’ve been a fuckboy because he liked ketchup, but, to her, it was because he couldn’t consent to sex (or other intimate relations) at a level she was comfortable with. Maybe next time she’ll swipe left.
This thread is not at all clear. Do anti-rape activists insist on a on a continuing series of explicit verbal requests and answers:
Q. May I hold your hand?
A. Yes
Q. May I touch you there?
A. No, but you my touch me here
…
I seriously doubt that they insist on that, but the perception that they might expect something like that might make some people reluctant to date them.
I’m imagining a 5x7 index card with a drawing of the front of a female on one side and the back of a female on the other side with areas of the figure shaded in different colors and a 3x5 card stapled to it with a legend telling which color means under what conditions a male might touch.
Yeah, I think I’m struggling because I’ve been presented with a secondary meaning first. I have never seen the term “fuckboy” before this thread. It makes sense to me as a term refering to a man who has to let himself be fucked because he is weak, which sounds like its original meaning. But here it is really just being used as a generic perjorative, which presumes that you are already familiar with the word and perhaps bored or no longer interested in it’s semantic content.
I think??
Yeah, this is spot-on. I wouldn’t date anyone who opened by threatening to accuse me of assault, either.
You’re the one who claimed it was – I’ve never heard that.
As far as I can see, only one definition comes remotely close to that.
I’m not talking about the definition; I’m talking about the implied metaphor that, I believe, gives rise to the definition. Someone who is butthurt is whining because they were on the losing end of some kind of confrontation or conflict. When young men talk about dominance and power, they often use expressions alluding to anal rape. (Cite: I spent much of my adolescence in a boys’ dormitory.)
“Don’t listen to that fuckboy. He’s just butthurt because I made him bend over and take it.”
I’m bored because this has devolved into some convoluted discussion on the mythos of fuckboy, but like I initially said, it means different things to different communities. She used a bit of AAVE to describe someone who meant nothing to her (because they disagreed on consent) whom she met on Tinder (hence the “swipe left” comment I made). Fuckboy can mean some dude who you fuck, a friend with benefits or maybe a not-so-friendly situation (maybe one lacking consent?) with sex involved. I’m sure it means other things, too. But in this instance/context/usage/whatever, it just means “some dude who ain’t shit.”
I have described this word with such detail that it means nothing to me anymore and I honestly wish she would’ve called the guy some more easily understandable perjorative. Then again my eyes gloss over at Latin, so it’s really not that big of a deal. We all have our limits.
These sort of misunderstandings occur when we feel entitled to virtually instant physical intimacy with people with whom we have not built emotional intimacy.
Not to equate the two, But so will rape.
That’s the problem. She hadn’t met him and unless part of the article is missing, saying what you just said is labeling him as a rapist when he’s not one. Where do you or she get the idea that he’s entitled to instant physical intimacy? She just automatically, as a precursor to the date, said ‘any funny stuff and I’ll call the chief of police’.
He might have been an extremely shy guy that wouldn’t have gotten within 6 inches of her until the 4th date and waited for her to kiss him first. Maybe he’s still a virgin, saving himself for marriage. But now all he can think about is that he’s needs to worry that if he does anything wrong he’ll be fighting a rape charge. She’s made that very clear.
I’d break the date too. And it looks like he made the right decision. He had a few back and forths with her, broke off the date and now there’s an article about it. She comes off as nuts. IMO, he dodged a bullet.
It wouldn’t surprise me if she lives for that kind of interaction. Looking for guys that hate dealing with consent (or finding ways to make it seem like they don’t like it, like this case).
I’d bet we all have a friend or two that are always angry about something, but in realty, really and truly, they’re usually putting themself in the situation that they’re angry about because deep down they actually like being angry about it. Do you think that might be the case here?