Your story is vague, but there was certainly something very sexual going on even if it wasn’t sex. So maybe it wasn’t literal rape, but it was basically some flavor of sexual assault, which isn’t much better.
Most feminists don’t think most men want to rape people. Most feminists think most men are pretty decent guys, which is precisely why a lot of things can be difficult to get through to men. Most men are decent, most men don’t do terrible things to women, and most of the really bad stuff is done in private, not around 30 other people. So most men don’t really see it happen, because they’re good people and not doing it. When women see it happen, it’s because they’re alone with a man or a couple men. Every man’s experience with a woman alone necessarily includes himself, with all his flaws and strengths. Women’s experience alone with men include a large number of men and thus they have a better picture of what guys do around women when they’re alone. (And yes, of course, men have a better picture of what women do when around men alone).
The problem most feminists have isn’t that all men are out to rape you, it’s that some men are out to rape you and they look just like the nice ones. Now, we can argue about violence statistics and say that men are more likely to be on the receiving end of violent crime in general, and thus have more of a right to be paranoid, but that’s not the point here. The point is that (most) feminists don’t think every man is out to rape them, they’re worried about the society that makes it possible for the small number of men that want to rape able to do it.
And of course, that doesn’t include the cultural problems (“rape culture”, as much as I hate the term and a lot of its definitions) where men will take advantage of women without realizing they’re doing it (e.g. the archetypal taking advantage of a drunk chick). Most feminists I’ve met don’t really blame men for it, not even the perpetrators, so much as they blame the cultural upbringing that led them to believe it’s okay.
Yes you did when you said “It only seems to have alienated thinly veiled misogynists.” By definition, that means you are calling women “thinly veiled misogynists” who don’t like feminism because they think it bashes men or because too many feminists are control freaks. Two things that women have complained about in this very thread.
Der, what is your ideal outcome in this exchange with ladyfoxfyre? Do you want her to say feminism is wrong or bad? Do you want her to say she’s wrong and you’re right? Honestly, I’m a bit confused by your combativeness here.
This is my position as well. And as a disabled man, I’ve seen and experienced enough genuine discrimination in my life to put the concerns of the post-modern radical feminists into perspective.
So can the girl who had her sex organs removed in the backyard with a piece of broken glass so she could be sold (wait…ahem…married) to an old man for rape at puberty say that she see no real use of focusing on disability rights, as she has seen enough discrimination in their life to put your concerns into perspective?
No matter how bad off you are, there is probably someone worse off than you. But that doesn’t make the bad stuff in your life suck any less.
Absolutely right, and I’m not interested in a debate over “my problems are worse than yours”.
But imagine for a second being in your late 20s and intelligent enough to be doing a computer science degree and yet the government employee in charge of keeping the disabled in the community suggests you should be put in a nursing home. No matter how sound your mind is or how much you may be able to contribute to society, a bureaucrat who wields immense power over your life decides you should be institutionalised merely for a congenital condition you have no control over. This was around 2005 in Sydney, Australia, mind you, not 1905 in Iran.
What I’m getting at here is that women in developing nations still have it pretty tough, but the disabled (and other minorities) are getting shafted in developed nations on a grand scale while women’s rights in these same countries have soared over the last 100 years. What incentive is there for me to personally identify as a “feminist” when I am part of a minority still struggling for the dignity that able-bodied women take for granted in my country every day?
That’s not to say that I don’t think equal rights for women is a worthy cause. I 100% do. But I believe equal rights for everyone is a worthy cause, and given that I see ample evidence to support the assertion that women do not have a monopoly on being targets of oppression, I see no use in calling myself a “feminist” when I’m really a “humanist”.
“I believe Obama was born in Kenya, but I’m not a birther”
“I believe God so loved the world that he gave his only son who died on the cross for our sins so we can have eternal life, but I’m not a Christian.”
You can call yourself whatever you want, but per the definition of feminism, you might want examine your motivations for not wanting to call yourself feminist. Not being a feminist means you do not support women having equal rights to men. Being a “humanist” and not a feminist means you support equal rights for everyone except women.
I’m a feminist in a strict prescriptivist sense, but the people I know IRL who consider themselves feminists are kind of on the wrong side of sane, at least on the issue of women’s rights.
One self-declared feminist I know–a guy, incidentally–maintained that women universally do not enjoy vaginal intercourse and that the practice was purely for male gratification and part of he patriarchy’s control over women. (Incidentally, he also claimed his heterosexual long-term relationship was most comparable to a lesbian relationship–a statement which, ironically, is about as loaded with gender-role stereotypes as you can get.)
These sort of people nowadays tend to be in the majority when it comes to openly identifying as a feminist: the “gender studies” crowd who claim that science is a patriarchal construct, say. Like it or not, the label “feminist” has been hijacked by crazies who are more-or-less disconnected from reality, and I think it’s reasonable for a person to choose to not be associated with such radicals.
Besides, the question is “Do you consider yourself a feminist?” not “Strictly speaking from a purely definitional perspective, are you really a feminist?”
All these tales of crazed feminists baffle me (I’m not doubting you, mind). I’ve never met anyone like that. But look at this board: we have a few men telling us feminism is a heinous crime against humanity, and one rapist who thinks his crime was a prank. Where are all the crazy feminists though? As it stands, there are more feminists responding to this thread (143 or 76%), yet the voices from the rabid “anti-feminist” crowd are a lot louder.
I’m really not seeing the argument for all these mad feminists. I’m sure there are a few, but compared to what we’re apparently up against, it’s not too bad. You’ve encountered a bad egg, I’m sorry about that. But again, look at the stats in this thread. Feminists are people who support women’s right. As that should theoretically be everyone, obviously there will some crazies.
The question was “Do you consider yourself a feminist?” Not “Are you a feminist?” or “Do you follow the rules as laid out by someone as to what feminism is?”.
I believe in equality of the sexes. I don’t consider myself a feminist. There is no problem/hypocrisy/whatever with that at all.
What makes you think someone like that would show up here? Someone like that is going to stay at their own message boards, the sort that ban anyone who dares to question orthodoxy.
There are all sorts of recommendations given to people to try and avoid someone committing a crime against them. As a student we we instructed where in the city we shouldn’t go, which pubs and clubs to avoid in which nights, because people were known to have strange views regarding students and there had previously been violent incidents.
It is good advice. “People that have committed crimes often used A as justification, so we suggest that in the interest of your own safety you don’t do A” doesn’t blame the victim if the crime happens - and that sentence is as generic as it comes. It can be used for pretty much any crime.
Quite simply, giving advice on how to avoid having a crime committed against you is absolutely not the same as saying it is your fault if the crime is committed against you. Yes, some stupid idiots may act like that is true, but those stupid idiots aren’t what we are discussing. We are discussing the very concept of being given helpful advice.
Quite a lot of it does however. There’s still to my knowledge no evidence that “dressing provocatively” makes a woman more likely to be raped; or that dressing “modestly” makes her less likely to be raped for that matter. But that’s usually recommendation #1 on “how not to get raped”.