I genuinely believe that most men do not rape women. Despite generally agreeing with Andrea Dworkin’s overall theory about the way that dominance and oppression taint all of our relationships, I really do assume that almost all men who have sex with women are looking for a sexual relationship…
this idea plays straight into the cloying, coercive model of consent espoused by these people (who decided it was a good idea to instate a verbal request at each individual step of the way? more opportunities for puppy dog eyes and repeated pressure, just what everyone needed)
love this analysis, everyone should read this esp. dudes and people into dudes
from gales’s later reblog:
I do not believe that there is a middle ground between rapey sociopaths and decent, respectful men. I don’t believe that there is a wide swath of men who only need to taught not to rape, that those men assault out of ignorance and social conditioning, and can be taught otherwise. I don’t believe we can prevent sexual violence with consent workshops and safewords.
All right, so what would your ideal model of consent look like? Have people here read the collection _Yes Means Yes_, by the way?
You’ve got a pro-domme, a hooker with a lot of domme experience and together a combined 15+ years experience in recreational kink shaking our damn heads at you over here.
Yes, but did you read the book?
I should really be writing about something besides Hugo Schwyzer, unless I really do want to write a thesis on the guy, but this.
There is no absolute value for sexy! There is no normative shared definition of sexy between men and women fucking each other in patriarchal rape culture! Just like there’s no single definition of scary. If one half of that equation is “potential rape victim” and the other half is “potential rapist,” then their definitions of reassurance, comfort and pleasure—their levels of insight—are going to conflict, even for men who genuinely want their partners to feel safe and happy. That’s what the prevalence of rape means. That’s the climate that creates sexual violence and the climate sexual violence creates. It’s not about permission: a mutual model of sex depends on a whole lot more than straightforward negotiation between two people who can talk about what they each want.
And you need to deal with that, or else you’re going to attach some extremely counterproductive meanings to consent as well. I understand that it’s the title of an anthology, not a bumper sticker, and that the writers explore the issue in depth, but you can’t just say “Consent is sexy! Yay consent!” without considering everything you’ve said, especially if your goal is to reinvent rape prevention. You have to unpack all of it.
And because I just can’t not talk about Hugo Schwyzer, he is a perfect example of why bad feminism kills. His definition of sexy is abusive. That means that his definition of consent is abusive: it is built to accommodate harmful behavior towards women. That holds true no matter how verbal or formal it is, no matter how focused on obtaining permission. And when you just go “consent is sexy!” “yes means yes!” as though you haven’t just found yourself sharing those soundbites with an abusive, manipulative, creepy, and generally untrustworthy man, then your activism is supporting his behavior. Dude latches on to everything sticky, but why would he gravitate towards this?
No model of consent should ever be pragmatic towards the prevalence of rape, either, or dismissive of women who do not feel safe with its terms.
Since the criticism of this post was met largely with total disregard, dismissal and sneers of how stupid it was, I’m just going to insert my perspective real basic.
I really do assume that almost all men who have sex with women are looking for a sexual relationship based on mutual affection and mutual pleasure.
This is not true of my experience. This is not true of many women that I know.
I believe most men are invested enough in the happiness of their romantic partner and have spent enough of their life genuinely concerned with the well-being of people around them, that they would never find themselves in a situation where a romantic partner tells them one day that they have been raping her.
This is not true of my experience. This is not true of many women I know. This ignores many of the ways rape happens and the way people rape.
Almost all men are perfectly capable of reading non-verbal communication. And most men don’t cavalierly ignore non-verbal communication to continue with the fucking they wanted.
This is profoundly not true of my experience. This is not true of many women that I know.
Now, in saying all of this is not true of my experience or that of many women that I know, I’m not claiming that it’s never happened and never happened to me! I have had positive sexual experiences with men where mutual affection and mutual pleasure and care and concern and attention has been shown. But it hasn’t made up the bulk of my experience! Several other women have flagged that it has not been the bulk of their experience either, only to be met with ridicule and derision. Why? In favour of coddling men’s egotistic need to believe they could never be rapists, that only bad bogeymen like Schwyzer do that??
This is our problem with the post. Because in the way the discussion has been set up, what’s left then is that it’s our fault this is the way it’s been for us. Because actually the vast majority of men are sensitive attentive lovers really invested in their partner in a genuine and authentic way and we’re just the nitwits who keep choosing the rapists.
Look, I don’t tolerate any accidental rape bullshit and I agree that’s what Schwyzer is trying to do and it’s completely fucked up and wrong and apologist.
But when we push back against this idea that most men don’t want to rape, would never find themselves in a place where a partner says they’ve been raping them, don’t ignore cues to continue doing what they want - we don’t think they’re doing any of that shit accidentally! Even if they get all confused and wide eyed and perplexed about it later on, no it’s not ignorance. They just chose to ignore the cues in favour of their orgasm because it’s a murky area to define and social power is on their side. Or they just don’t care until it seems like it might have repercussions, like them being made to confront it. These are not narcissists or sociopaths! They’re just men! Normal, every day, average men. Splitting them into two camps is bullshit!
Also, suggesting we shouldn’t be cynical based on our experiences seems way fucked up and anti-feminist to me.
Here’s some prepubescent in a bikini! Here’s a woman bloodied and getting her ass beat by a large man! Here’s some incest! Some anti-Semitism! Some ni**er jailbait! Ha ha ha ha! I have my rights; free speech man! I’m just trollin’! If they don’t like it, they shouldn’t have…well, put themselves in that position.
Oh wait, don’t tell on me man. I got a mortgage, my boss will get mad, I have FEELINGS man, you’re really gonna mess me up. Have a heart, have some SYMPATHY. Care about ME! Because what you’re doing is way worse than racism, homophobia, and posting pictures of unsuspecting women. Cause I say so.
Fuck you fucker. Deal with and lay in the vomit pool you created by your own hand."
— Commenter on “Unmasking Reddit’s Violentacrez, The Biggest Troll on the Web” (via lavenderlabia)
Also, the irony of Hugo calling his critics “sanctimonious” when that’s what white feminists used to call him all the time, when that used to be a charge he vehemently defended himself against, when the worst any feminist had to say of him was that he was a condescending, sanctimonious born-again Christian ruining everyone’s carefree sex-positive vibes—the irony of THAT word now being the one he throws against abuse survivors is … horrible.
Sociopaths are expert script-flippers. Expert, top-notch script-flippers.
Thank you, thank you, every feminist who united under the banner of Internet Takedown Culture Is the Greatest Threat Women Online Face Today. Thank you for making everything 1,000,000 times WORSE for survivors. I hope every rotten penny any of you ever earned decrying rape culture, gaslighting, and abuse corrodes your soul to the point that you can’t do this to us anymore. Hugo’s the tool, but you’re the ones wielding him—against those who have already been victimized once, twice, a dozen times.
So I think that’s actually a calm, measured, and reasonable thing for me to hope under the circumstances.
If we’ve learned anything from the Tosh incident it’s that nope, women can’t react proactively when threatened with offensive speech because if we do, the guy with the mic can wish gang rape on us and be cheered on by the internet at large while doing it.
If anyone has ever wondered why someone hasn’t spoken up when offended in the moment, this is why.
Haley defended the veto, according to the Charleston City Paper, saying that rape and sexual assault prevention programs “distract from” the Department of Health’s mission, and that sexual assault victims are “only a small portion” of South Carolinians who need help:
Haley explained these vetoes in the Department of Health and Environmental Control budget by writing, “Each of these lines attempts to serve a portion of our population for which we extend our sympathy and encouragement, but nevertheless, it is only a small portion of South Carolina’s chronically ill or abused. Overall, these special add-on lines distract from the agency’s broader mission of protecting South Carolina’s public health.”
Sexual assault and domestic violence victims often feel totally alone in the world, so Haley’s consolation that they are only a small portion probably does little good.
Holy fucking shit this is reprehensible.
Utterly shittastic. Government should not be in the business of preventing crimes, right, Republicans?
This is something that happened to a friend of mine in her own words.
“So, on Friday night my friend and I were at her house and wanted to get out and do something for the evening. We brainstormed ideas and she brought up the idea of seeing a show at the Laugh Factory. I’d never been, I thought it sounded fun, so we went. We saw that Dane Cook, along some other names we didn’t recognize we’re playing, and while we both agree that Cook’s style is not really our taste we were opened-minded about what the others had to offer. And we figured even good ol’ Dane can be funny sometimes, even if it’s not really our thing. Anyhoo, his act was actually fine, but then when his was done, some other guy I didn’t recognize took the stage. Of course, I would find out later this was Daniel Tosh, but at the time I thought he was just some yahoo who somehow got a gig going on after Cook. I honestly thought he was an amateur because he didn’t seem that comfortable on stage and seemed to have a really awkward presence.
So Tosh then starts making some very generalizing, declarative statements about rape jokes always being funny, how can a rape joke not be funny, rape is hilarious, etc. I don’t know why he was so repetitive about it but I felt provoked because I, for one, DON’T find them funny and never have. So I didnt appreciate Daniel Tosh (or anyone!) telling me I should find them funny. So I yelled out, “Actually, rape jokes are never funny!”
I did it because, even though being “disruptive” is against my nature, I felt that sitting there and saying nothing, or leaving quietly, would have been against my values as a person and as a woman. I don’t sit there while someone tells me how I should feel about something as profound and damaging as rape.
After I called out to him, Tosh paused for a moment. Then, he says, “Wouldn’t it be funny if that girl got raped by like, 5 guys right now? Like right now? What if a bunch of guys just raped her…” and I, completely stunned and finding it hard to process what was happening but knowing i needed to get out of there, immediately nudged my friend, who was also completely stunned, and we high-tailed it out of there. It was humiliating, of course, especially as the audience guffawed in response to Tosh, their eyes following us as we made our way out of there. I didn’t hear the rest of what he said about me.
Now in the lobby, I spoke with the girl at the will-call desk, and demanded to see the manager. The manager on duty quickly came out to speak with me, and she was profusely apologetic, and seemed genuinely sorry about what had happened, but of course we received no refund for our tickets, but instead a comped pair of tickets, although she admitted she understood if we never wanted to come back. I can imagine the Laugh Factory doesn’t really have a policy in place for what happens when a woman has to leave in a hurry because the person onstage is hurling violent words about sexual violence at her. Although maybe I’m not the first girl to have that happen to her.
I should probably add that having to basically flee while Tosh was enthusing about how hilarious it would be if I was gang-raped in that small, claustrophic room was pretty viscerally terrifying and threatening all the same, even if the actual scenario was unlikely to take place. The suggestion of it is violent enough and was meant to put me in my place.”
Please reblog and spread the word.
Emphasis added. I already knew Daniel Tosh was awful for various reasons. He’s worse than I thought.
— ksej, finding the truth in a rape joke
- Girl 1: Oh my God did you hear what that bitch Annie* did?!
- Girl 2: No, what?
- Girl 1: She said that Coach G* had raped her for three years in high school.
- Girl 2: What the fuck?! That's disgusting! How could anyone accuse someone like Coach G of that?! I hope she fucking kills herself she's scum.
- Girl 1: I know some people have no shame.
- Me: Excuse me, were you there?
- Girl 1: Uh ... what?
- Me: Were you there?
- Girl 2: Was she where?
- Me: Were you there while he raped or didn't rape her?
- Girl 1: Well I -
- Me: Were you there or not?
- Girl 1: She's -
- Me: It's a yes or no question. Were you there or not?
- Girl 1: No, but -
- Me: Then it's settled. You are not Annie, you are not Coach G, and you were not even at the scene of the alleged crime. You have absolutely no clue what the fuck you are talking about.
- Girl 2: I don't know who you are, but you clearly don't know Coach G, he'd never do that.
- Me: I don't know who you two ignorant asses are, but you clearly don't understand that anyone can and will rape. Many rapists are people like Coach G, they put themselves in a position of power, they make everyone, like you two, love them and think they can do no wrong. That's how they get away with their crimes.
- Girl 1: Annie has lied about stuff before.
- Me: I'm sure both of you have told lies in your life before too, but does that mean everything out of your mouth is automatically bullshit?
- Girl 1:
- Girl 2:
- Me: Exactly. I suggest you two stay the fuck away from Coach G, and whoever Annie is, because she deserves decent people around her, which you two aren't.