So, which part of my life do I give up to avoid being raped?

The BBQ Pit
61

I’d like to see how the question was phrased. If it was “Have you ever had sex when you didn’t want to?”, then I guess I’ve been raped as well. There were some times I was not really up for it but felt duty-bound to satisfy my partner. Or “Have you ever said ‘no’ during sex but it kept on going?” Does it count if it was in answer to “Want me to stop?”

Not to call you a liar or anything, nor to doubt that rape is alarmingly common, but sometimes these things are phrased in such a way that the results can be misleading. I’m reluctant to take it at face value.

62

This is the kind of thing I’m talking about. You see, if I “don’t walk alone at night” it means I don’t go to choir practice or to get together with friends at a bookstore in the suburbs, even though in those cases, I’m only walking to or from my car. Back before I had a car, it basically meant that I shouldn’t go out at night.

There’s one other irony I’m aware of. Because rapes by strangers are rare, a woman may well be more at risk if she accepts an escort from a fellow she knows slightly but not well than she would be if she walked alone. Now, the men I know well wouldn’t do that, but I know the figures I’ve seen. I also know that when I’ve had to deal with unwanted physical contact, it has almost always been with a man with whom I’ve been slightly but not well acquainted with who did not appear to understand that polite conversation along the lines of “Hello, how’s it going?” was not an invitation to kiss me or fondle my breasts. The exception to this rule was a coworker who did not understand that when I said I didn’t want to date him because he was married, I meant it.

It’s funny. I’m actually not all that worried when I’m travelling somewhere on my own; experience has given me no reason to be, even though I’ve ridden the East Busway fairly late at night and gotten stranded in Wilkinsburg (catsix, there was one street in South Oakland which I was told to avoid back when I was in college simply because it was poorly lit and crimes happened there). It’s in more ordinary situations – going to or from work, hanging out clothes, or, during my brief stint at a McDonald’s, even at work that the situation has gotten decidedly uncomfortable. No, I didn’t expect a white-haired old man who was one of our regulars to throw me on the ground and rape me right in front of everyone at McDonald’s, but he did deliberately move into the end of a booth I was cleaning, trapping me between him and the wall. Nothing happened except for a naive, 22 year old kid getting scared, but I wish it hadn’t happened.

I live my life on my own terms, taking reasonable precautions as I see fit. I’ve travelled a few hundred miles with two men, one of whom was a complete stranger and enjoyed their company. Both of them are still friends and we laugh at the prospect of them kidnapping me off to the wilds of Ohio and (warning, this is shocking!) :gasp!: forcing me to discuss German philosophy! In German, no less!!! :eek: No such horror happened, of course. Hell, four years ago, I worried my grandmother because I’d gone to the local pub with a bunch of strange men and was having a glass of cider with them. Keep in mind, this was in England where the cider does contain alcohol. They were bell ringers from the local church and I’d rung bells when I lived in Hawaii. I believe one of them drove me back to my grandmother’s, although I had planned on walking the mile or so there. Maybe I’m being vain, naive, or stupid, but I trusted my instincts. So far, they haven’t let me down. Yes, I hope it continues that way, too, but, while I admit to being a feminist, I see no reason to mistrust men as a whole or tar the entire half of the species because of the actions of a very, very few. Indeed, I’m reluctant to compliment such creatures by calling them “men”.

CJ

63

Being a woman is not akin to flashing a wad of cash in a dark alley. There are few cases where anyone really has a good reason to flash their wads of cash, but a woman cannot help but be a woman as she goes about her life. And I do think that women have some good reasons to want to be outside without a gaurdian during the dark eight to twelve hours of the day.

Adhering to all these rules can seriously affect a woman’s ability to rise in the world. In the independent film industry, a lot of important networking and brainstorming occurs during male-dominated drinking sessions. A film student that counts herself out of the after-class bar visits is going to miss out on a lot, and will probably have trouble in her career. Sometimes film shoots require travel to distant locations, which may mean driving with an unfamilier man and even sharing a hotel room (or, more likely, someone’s living room floor) with one. Female filmmakers also face long streches in dark editing booths with men. It’s a male dominated industry, and one which is too competative and too scarce in resources to be picky about being around men. Nobody is going to spend another fifty bucks out of their 3k budget just so you don’t have to share your hotel room with a man.

I’m sure other industries are like this. A woman that is unwilling to travel alone to strange places, be alone with strange men, go out independently at night, participate in after work activities that may involve alcohol and otherwise be a part of business culture will not be able to compete like a man can. And yet we are willing to say that women that do these things are being unwise and even (I swear to god I heard it here first) immoral. What world do we live in when we consider sacrficing your career, your mobility and your freedom a reasonable price to pay for safety? These are not reasonable precautions. We are asking women to give up way too much.

64

It’s a risk to do so, as is everything else. Stepping out of the bathtub or the shower is a risk, but it’s one that everybody takes. You have judged this to be an acceptable risk where you are because it is probably a very small one. It’s the same where I am. Would you walk through the Hill District alone at night? I wouldn’t.

Mostly though, the advice I’ve heard and that I’ve given to people (yes, male and female) is to always be aware of your surroundings and to look as though you have purpose. Don’t look lost, weak, or timid.

There are some areas out there where attacks happen, and not just rapes. I remember a few stabbings while I was in college. It didn’t, however, stop me from going where I wanted when I wanted because I judged the risk to be acceptable to me. If it’s not acceptable to someone else, that is entirely their choice to make.

I trusted mine my entire life. I was wrong once, but I haven’t let that change my ability to trust my instincts. All it means is that I was wrong once.

Then you understand why I object to such phrasing as ‘Men rape women.’?

65

You miss the point by a mile. The point is that there are always risks to everything, and one must judge what is and is not an acceptable risk to them. There are some places I would be hesitant to walk around alone at night because in those neighborhoods, I could get assaulted for being white and on someone else’s turf. Being white’s surely not ‘flashing a wad of cash’ either, but in those neighborhoods it’s a factor that will affect my safety.

The idea is that you’ve got to look out for number one, because it’s nobody else’s job to.

Did I say that they can’t? Or did I say that it’s sometimes better to avoid areas with high violent crime rates during times when there are less deterrants to crime like, say, witnesses? I work until 22:00 three nights a week. That means it’s dark when I leave the building (and I’m usually the last one there) and it’s dark while I drive home and it’s dark while I walk from my car to my house. Obviously I have no inclination to say that a woman should never go out alone after dark!

What rules, sven? The first person who started posting ‘rules’ was you, and perhaps one other poster has said it’s a bad idea to walk around alone at night. In some areas, particularly those with high violent crime rates and lots of incidents of things like muggings, that’s good advice.

Who in the hell is asking them to give that up? You keep saying that they’re being asked to give all these things up, but who is doing the asking?

The only one I see suggesting anything of the sort is you.

66

Are you saying that taking precautions doesn’t prevent rape at all, and that foolhardiness and not taking basic safety precautions would make absolutely no difference whatsoever to the number of sexual assaults that take place? Well, and not to mention reducing common assaults, robberies, and other lesser crimes?

Surely you jest? It’s a preposterous statement. Sometimes you should not go aout alone.

I would agree that people can exaggerate the threat and overdo it, but there’s something to be said for common sense in some circumstances.

67

From Finn Again.
Fucking thing ate my laboriously-formatted post.

"No, I’m disagreeing and saying that you’re phrasing it badly. But I assure you that I am paying attention. Women need to protect themselves, just like men need to protect themselves. Both of these are true even if some people think that women don’t protect themselves, or whatever. "

What you’re missing is that men have the luxury of not needing to protect themselves as much as do women. Bricker noted that missing from his experience was the tone of grim satisfaction.

“Good for them! But, as I’m sure you know, not all women do. Hell, it’s rare to find that all members of any group have a generalization which will stick to them.”

You’re saying that not all women do. I’m saying that just about all women do. We’re somewhere in the same neighborhood.
"Sometimes, people can make bad choices. If I visit my home town and take a walk through Harlem at four a.m., I should expect something might happen. Would I be at fault for being attacked? No. Would my attacker be able to get out of jail free? No.
Would it be my fault for not thinking ahead and protecting myself? Yes. "

Straw man; the walk through the dark alley. Stereotype. How far back do we go to blame the woman? She chose to leave the house that day? She chose to wear that outfit?
"Don’t suggest I’m being disingenous unless you particularly want me to start slinging choice adjectives back at you. And I have no idea what women need to do or how many do it. I’d assume that some common sense things apply, like not walking alone at night through bad parts of town, stuff like that. I’m no expert on personal safety so I can’t tell you. "

The dark part of town straw man again and a threat to toss around adjectives.  How nice.  You don't know what women need to do or how many do it?  Then why object when someone says what women need and do?

"Okay, this is batshit crazy.
First off all, how is it giving up on preventing rape? You are aware that law is, by and large, punitive and not prohibitive? You can’t have cops on every corner watching for rapists. The best defense against a rapist, a mugger, etc… is to not put yourself in danger in the first place. The second best defense is to know what to do if you are in such a situation.
And, raising men differently? How on earth do modern american child rearing practices contribute to the pathology inherent in rape? Are you honestly suggesting that there is a systemic flaw in how males are raised that makes us rapists? "

I can’t see my quote, but my thinking goes something like this. Rape is at the end of a spectrum of sexist behavior directed at women. Want to fight it? Start at the beginning. Fighting it by the time it has gotten as far as rape is too damned late. Preventing rape would mean preventing the things that lead up to it. It’s like trying to fight fires only after they reach the three-alarm phase. And raising men differently? Men evidently feel entitled to a safe world that they can control to a degree not available to women.

"I think you have a desire to see the worst possible side/motives of this.
Me, if I was an army officer and I had female troops getting gang raped, you better damn well believe I’d order them to walk in pairs. Four eyes are far better at keeping alert than two. "

This is akin to Golda Meir’s comment when a number of rapes occurred. Someone proposed a curfew on women. Her response? “They’re not the ones committing the rapes.” We as a society demand that women curfew themselves. Also? You’re not entitled to psychoanalyze me. Do it again, and I’ll ignore further posts.

"Does it suck that there are some wolves out there? Yes, it does. Does that mean you shouldn’t prepare for the very real fact that someone might try to do you harm? Nope. "

Could you make up your mind? “Not all women” protect themselves, yet here is the assumption that ‘doing harm’ will happen. A very real fact? How real? To what degree? To a degree of self-curfew? Burkas? What? And if rape is a ‘very real fact’ then it’s common—but where are the anti-rape workshops directed at MEN?

"Well, I’m not police officer, but it strikes me that if someone was properly protecting themself, they couldn’t be raped, assaulted, robbed, etc… I don’t see it as being tremendously different from any other crime. "

Exceedingly naive. And blaming the victim, too. They must not have been properly protecting themselves.

"Which would , of course, ignore the fact that women also rape men (yes, it’s rare but it does happen), that some women probably rape other women, and that men rape other men. What does this mean though? "

It means you're using another straw man.  Female rape of men, according to Brownmiller, is so statistically rare as to be an anomaly, factoring out child abuse.  Don't let that stop you from trying to introduce an irrelevancy into the discussion. We're discussing male-on-female rape, and what women should do to preent it happening to them--and how much is reasonable to demand of them.

“Robberies keep happening too, and those damn bastards want me to put a lock on my door! The nerve!”

 Perilously close to a straw man. To be analgous to what we're discussing here, it would have to be more like:  Robbers keep robbing, and yet people still keep wearing good clothes and jewelry outside of their houses in broad daylight.  Careless bastards. How dare they actually wear jewelry and have money in their wallets, and live normal lives.  If they don't want to get robbed, they should wear sackcloth and ashes.  If they do get robbed, they should just have protected themselves better. The robber said they just gave him the stuff. They didn't say no. They must have wanted to get robbed.

“My lay-person advice would be that women need to be situationaly aware at all times, probably study a close combat martial art like Aikido, and not take any unnecessary risks.
Which, by the way, is the same advice I’d give to a man who was worried about his security.”

Men don’t have to worry about their security to the intimate degree that is demanded of women, a point which the OP made and which you have strenuously avoided seeing ever since.

68

ITA=I totally agree.

And I also agree with sven’s analogy.

The medicine may ammeliorate some “symptoms” but it’s the disease we need to eradicate…

69

Saying reality sucks sometimes doesn’t excuse anyone from ignoring it.

Is it fair that women have to make choices between not doing things they might want to do and increasing their chances of being raped? No, it’s not fair.

Is it true that women have to make choices between not doing things they might want to do and increasing their chances of being raped? Yes, it is true.

It would be great if it were possible to do anything you wanted in life and not have to worry about the consequences. It would also be great if good things and bad things only happened to the people who deserved them. But this is the real world.

Here’s a real fact. Women who go jogging while wearing radio headphones are twenty times as likely to be attacked as women who don’t. Criminals have admitted they target women wearing headphones because they’re more vulnerable. So if you’re a woman who likes to jog and listen to music, you’ve got to make a choice. Does your decision reflect on your morals? No. Is it fair you should have to make this choice? No. Will saying it’s unfair affect the facts in any way? No. Which choice should you make? You’re a grown-up and it’s your life. You decide.

70

Sort of inspired by the Golda Meir reference:

I went to a college that, until a couple of years before I got there (back in the good ol’ '60s), had been women-only. With the addition of men came two problems–a big increase in the number of rapes, and a big increase in stolen bicycles.

To address one problem bike racks were installed so that people could lock their bikes–which had apparently been totally unnecessary before the men arrived on campus.

To address the second problem, a curfew was instituted. Guess what? The curfew was NOT for men.

71

I I were an army officer and had female troops getting gang raped, I would order all male troops to travel with no other males and to be accompanied by two female soldiers at all times.

72

Then you would have commited an act of unmitigated ignorance and stupidity.
To begin with, she didn’t say it was other military people commiting the rapes, so punishing all the men is idiotic. You would also end up punishing perfectly law abiding soldiers.

The fact of the matter is that you don’t get to restrict the rights of an entire half of the damn species because some of them happen to commit crimes. Women should take care of their own security, just like men. Punishing innocent men because some other men raped someone is the height of stupidity and bigotry.

To other folk: I’ll respond as I’m able.

73

Sorry, but I’m still not seeing the part where anyone says women are responsible for being raped. Any chance we could get a post #?

74

Rune - stop stalking me.
What has the statistics of rape where I live to do with the statistics of the US?

75

"The fact of the matter is that you don’t get to restrict the rights of an entire half of the damn species because some of them happen to commit crimes. Women should take care of their own security, just like men. Punishing innocent men because some other men raped someone is the height of stupidity and bigotry. "
You’re still ignoring the central point. Women do take precautions, and get raped anyway. Society is uncomfortable with anything but the guy in the alleyway type of rapist, which you yourself used as an example at least twice. Why is it acceptable to demand that women curfew themselves----because they might get attacked—while men who might attack them are granted all the freedom they want? We restrict women so that men can be given more freedom. If it’s fair to restrict women to ‘protect’ them then it’s fair to restrict men for what they might do.

Anyway, what level of restrictions are okay, to go back to the OP? Self curfew? Being inside by dark? Dressing conservatively?

76

But, when you tell women they should walk in pairs, you’re restricting the rights of our half of the species because a minority of us are the victims of a specific crime and we are, in effect, punished for being victims. How is it wrong to restrict the freedom of men by telling them they cannot go out unless accompanied by a woman, yet sensible to restrict the freedom of women by telling them they cannot go out unless accompanied by another woman?

CJ

77

No, you’re ignoring the central point. Regardless of how many women are raped, it is still a fascist and idiotic action to limit the right of law abiding males. An analogy should suffice

“Some men are commiting rape, so we should give them all curfews.”
“Some black men are commiting robbery, so we should give them all curfews.”

Um, cite that I am in any way ‘unfomfortable’ with accepting that there are date-rapists? Or did you throw in the refrence to my argument for no purpose?

Last I saw, nobody was making a law. You’re free to do whatever you want. There are simply certain activities that are risky.

Um… because being in a group that in (your misguided opinion) means they ‘might’ be a rapist isn’t grounds for revocation of their civil rights?
If, however, you planned on curfewing known sex offenders (eg. men who actually might attack women) then maybe I could agree.

Hate to break it to you, but no matter how many women are raped, you don’t have the goddamn right to lock me in my house if I’ve commited no crime.
Sorry.

Peddle this misandryonystic bullshit elsewhere.

Do we? What states have curfew-laws-only-for-women on the books?
And, not being held under house arrest without commiting a crime is somehow giving men ‘more freedom?’ Funny, I never realized that basic civil rights are somehow ‘extra’ if you have a penis.

Absolute idiocy.
I know that if I walk into Harlam at 3:00 am, I’m proably going to get rolled. Does that give me the right to place everybody in Harlam under house arrest?

Freakin’ nuts.

I have no idea, what balance between safety and lifestyle do you want? If you really want to walk down dark alleys until you have blisters on your feet, I can’t stop you. I’m not proposing any legal limits to your behavior at all. I’m just saying that certain actions are risky, and the fact that they’re risky is not justification for rounding up all the men in the nation to make you feel safe.
Sorry.

78

This is just loopey.
How is making sure that women have escorts and are protected somehow wrong? If the criminal wasn’t a rapist, but a murderer, and you ordered all troops to travel in pairs, would you be ‘restricting their right’ to be murdered? Come on!

Um, because the men have done nothing wrong? Not that your desire to punish an entire group of people for no reason what-so-ever isn’t oh so quaint and cute…
And, because the decision to have women be accompanied by a second person is to protect them?

Group A is being attacked
Group B is not, nor are they the ones attacking group A.

What is logical? To protect group A, or to lock up group B and still have group A at risk?

This is just stupid.

79

[QUOTE=FinnAgain]
No, you’re ignoring the central point. Regardless of how many women are raped, it is still a fascist and idiotic action to limit the right of law abiding males. An analogy should suffice

“Some men are commiting rape, so we should give them all curfews.”
“Some black men are commiting robbery, so we should give them all curfews.”
[/QUOTE=FinnAgain]

Another straw man, sweetie. Time’s up. And as an added bonus, you used the race card. How nice.

That’s at least three times in various posts you’ve brought up some variation of the myth of the dark alley, yet you can’t see why this indicates that you have this rediculous stereotype on your mind to the exclusion of the reality of sexual assaults.

I missed the quote about ‘rounding up all men’ on first read through, but that’s it for me. That’s quite a huge leap. It’s almost Godwinian in its overkill. It is, however, quite enough to realize that I’m wasting my time with you.

80

I would suggest that the problem here is that rape-avoidance strategies are being focussed on disproportionately to avoidance-strategies of other crimes.

The one who says “If she carries on like that, she’ll end up getting raped” might mean well, but if statements of this kind are uttered more often than equivalents like[ul][li]If he carries on like that, he’ll end up getting beaten and robbed.[/li][li]If they carry on like that, they’ll end up getting burlged.[/li][li]If their kid carries on like that, it will eventually be kidnapped.[/li]If the city carries on like that, it will have a terrorist attack.[/ul] …then they sound downright menacing.