Shutter Fraternities for Young Women's Good

[knight_shadow]

Originally Posted by violetpretty

I don't think it is anti-feminist to insist that there are simple precautions that women can take to reduce their chances of acquaintance rape. I don't see it as blaming the vicitm as long as you also acknowledge that the perpetrator is ultimately responsible. Certain circumstances make you an easier target.

For example, suppose you're walking home from a party through a sketchy area of town at night, alone, buzzed. You get mugged. Was it your fault? No. Mugging people is wrong, duh. No one asks to be mugged. Sure, we all wish we had more money. Were there things you could have done to lessen your chances of being mugged? Yes. You could have taken a cab, stayed over, called someone, walked with a much larger group, have a DD with your friends.

Same goes with preventing acquaintance rape. Better to be realistic and proactive, rather than put your fate in someone else's hands.

You could also take a cab to your home and get mugged/raped while opening your door.

I think the point is that blaming a rape victim is not OK. Sure, we can take steps to make ourselves lesser targets, but if someone is targeting you, how do you prevent that? As long as victims have "Oh, you should have ____ and you would've have gotten raped!" hanging over their heads, the crime is going to be severely underreported.

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by 33girl

Some men have more willpower than others. Some men have weaker urges than others. I find it bizarre that you don't understand that men and women are biologically different, and that within those two genders are differences. I'm talking about YOUNG men for whom all this is relatively new.

Wow, talk about making assumptions. First it sounds very weird for a woman to say she knows that men feel urges that women cannot understand. I'm curious about what time you've spent in a biologically male body to undertake such extensive research. You are, indeed, essentially making the 'wear a burqa because men cannot control themselves' argument. Even if you're making some magic distinction between SOME men who can and SOME who can't. DrPhil addressed the rest of this.

I find it bizarre that you resort to making personal attacks rather than addressing the topic.

I'm sure there are guys who went out on a date with a girl never intending to exert any sort of pressure who ended up doing so because of their physical urges.

Which is why educating boys on consent is so important. But darn those urges, she could be crying and saying no and they just couldn't control themselves, amirite?

If you don't understand that, you must not have dated males in high school or college. Then again, you said you didn't like going to mixers and pretty much looked down your nose at them, so maybe you didn't.

This was the best you could do? Really? Geez, did you go ask a 13 year old to come up with your insults?

But NONE of this applies to the original post and giving someone a freakin' roofie. Or what fraternities have to do with it.

You are correct.

Originally Posted by sigmadiva

Thank you for observing this 33girl.


Now I think I understand the basis for why Drole says what she says.

LOL, you're right, I'm just a she-ra man-hater. Seriously, the best you can do is cast aspersions on my dating life?

Originally Posted by DrPhil

Interesting. I dated, attended social events and still disagree with the literal interpretation of "men are from mars, women are from venus." What it actually boils down to is that Drolefille and I (and those who feel as we do) have a different interpretation of what the biological differences result in.

Sex is biological and gender is social. The "nature versus nurture" debate has never been settled when it comes to gender. A big reason why is that there are no studies to provide solid evidence of the strength of biology over the strength of the social because no one is allowing test subjects who have just gotten out of the womb. One of the closest incidents that lends itself to the emphasis on "nature" is David Reimer whose story was shared in John Colapinto's As Nature Made Him: The Boy Who Was Raised as a Girl.

What I do know is there are people who have raised their own children to be gender neutral and relatively androgynous. Beyond some differences in hormones and bodies (and having to deal with people's stupid "what are you" taunts), there were fewer differences between the sons and daughters than there traditionally is when socialization is gendered.

I posit that the differences between the biological sexes has been exaggerated. For instance, girls and boys aren't born liking pink and blue or dolls and toy cars. Families decorate baby rooms with those things and therefore that becomes the first things the kids learn. Then that applies to how girls are taught to sit calmly and play with dolls while the boys can roar around with toy cars. Would those boys and girls do that if adults didn't teach and permit that? Females like myself who were raised both playing with dolls and toy cars; and jumping from trees "like the boys" are called "tomboys." People hope we'll grow out of it and it frightens parents when we don't. Then people wonder if kids who defy gender stereotypes will be homosexual or "will the young ladies ever stop being so aggressive like the men" or "will she ever be able to get married."

With allllll of that said, no, I'm not buying that men and women are just so darn different; and that these differences are innate or inevitable. I refuse to believe that men have these crazy penises and sexual urges that can't be stopped. That keeps men in the state of boys who are having their first wet dream. And I still don't see why the topic of sexual assault and rape has to be rooted in the presumed differences between men and women in the first place.

/damn this was a long post

It was long but it was very good. Which is why I quoted it in full.

don't think it is anti-feminist to insist that there are simple precautions that women can take to reduce their chances of acquaintance rape. I don't see it as blaming the vicitm as long as you also acknowledge that the perpetrator is ultimately responsible. Certain circumstances make you an easier target.

For example, suppose you're walking home from a party through a sketchy area of town at night, alone, buzzed. You get mugged. Was it your fault? No. Mugging people is wrong, duh. No one asks to be mugged. Sure, we all wish we had more money. Were there things you could have done to lessen your chances of being mugged? Yes. You could have taken a cab, stayed over, called someone, walked with a much larger group, have a DD with your friends.

Same goes with preventing acquaintance rape. Better to be realistic and proactive, rather than put your fate in someone else's hands.

Thing is, society focuses on the victim's mistakes following a rape. The victim who is already blaming herself as this is very much human nature, really doesn't need to hear that. Other victims look around at how victims who come forward are treated and decide not to speak up, that it was their fault, etc. Or they won't report a rape because they had a sexual relationship with their rapist, and they don't think they'll be believed.

My status as being in a consensual non-monogamous relationship would likely result a defense attorney arguing that I had consensual sex and regretted afterwards because, after all, look, I enjoy sex, I must be a little... you know *nudge nudge.*

No one is saying that women shouldn't take precautions to be safe, or be taught to, but more that women should not have to, and shouldn't be expected to be on their guard at all times, particularly with friends, partners, spouses, etc. since most rape occurs in those situations. And to prevent rape we should be primarily looking at the actors, the rapists, not the victims.

Originally Posted by knight_shadow

You could also take a cab to your home and get mugged/raped while opening your door.

I think the point is that blaming a rape victim is not OK. Sure, we can take steps to make ourselves lesser targets, but if someone is targeting you, how do you prevent that? As long as victims have "Oh, you should have ____ and you would've have gotten raped!" hanging over their heads, the crime is going to be severely underreported.

This.

[33girl]

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by 33girl

hotlinked.jpg

So, what you're saying is, you can dish out the personal insults, but can't defend your argument because you made it all up?

Run along, then.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by Drolefille

So, what you're saying is, you can dish out the personal insults, but can't defend your argument because you made it all up?

Run along, then.

Lesson learned:
Men and women are different. Just different. Get with that program, protect your vaginas, and the world will be a better place.

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

Lesson learned:
Men and women are different. Just different. Get with that program, protect your vaginas, and the world will be a better place.

I wouldn't know as a She-Ra man-hater. It's a biological fact that my tiny woman-brain cannot understand.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by Drolefille

I wouldn't know as a She-Ra man-hater. It's a biological fact that my tiny woman-brain cannot understand.

Thank me later:

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by 33girl

I'd rather a long post that some people don't want to read than a short post that's dumb as hell. Your post to Drolefille was dumb as hell.

[33girl]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

I'd rather a long post that some people don't want to read than a short post that's dumb as hell. Your post to Drolefille was dumb as hell.

I answered dumb with dumb. She was dumb to assume that I was saying biological urges = it's OK to rape.

And if all I have to go on is Drolefille's posts on this board, then yes, she does give off the impression that she really doesn't like men. Or women. Or life. Or much of anything in particular.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by 33girl

I answered dumb with dumb. She was dumb to assume that I was saying biological urges = it's OK to rape.

Well, insisting upon "boys will be boys" either implies that it's OK (there are some people who believe that) or implies that it is understandable or unpreventable. Either way, that puts the onus on women instead of the onus being where it should be, on both women and men.

Originally Posted by 33girl

And if all I have to go on is Drolefille's posts on this board, then yes, she does give off the impression that she really doesn't like men. Or women. Or life. Or much of anything in particular.

Opinions of usernames aside, everyone has a topic...or two or three or four...that they feel strongly about. It is interesting because if a man was to type what Drolefille has typed, I'm pretty sure the responses to his posts would be different. That's akin to how responses to posts about race and ethnicity (or sexual orientation, politics, etc.) are different depending upon the known race and ethnicity (sexual orientation, politics, etc.) of the poster.

[Ghostwriter]

Originally Posted by 33girl

And if all I have to go on is Drolefille's posts on this board, then yes, she does give off the impression that she really doesn't like men. Or women. Or life. Or much of anything in particular.

Luv a good



time!