A woman's rage

[ChristineM]

Our friend has his ups & downs.
If cut some slack, he'll come around to being reasonable.
Ain't nobody perfect (especially him).

And no, this olive branch is not to curry your favor, @columbus.

We will see.

 

[ChristineM]

Let's be clear about this: In your OP, you weren't explicitly complaining about rape. You were complaining about men (the ones who are not violent and not rapists) not understanding what it's like. That's an important distinction which should be noted.

And if you think that women are only "beginning" to stand up, all I can say is, where have you been? Women have been standing up against rape for as long as I can remember. And most men (including myself) have been standing with them. But you appear to be so clouded by such blind rage that you simply can not see when someone is actually on your side.

Lets be very clear, i was complaining of no such thing, i posted an article and asked for comments.

Some few women have been standing up to rape, the misogynistic institutional attitude put most off. That attitude is slowly changing, the incidence of rape/abuse reporting is correspondingly increasing.

I am simply responding to your posts, i am not alone in that. And ad hom is not a good tactic, i do not show and feel any ''blind rage' how about hormones or emotions next?

 

[Stevicus]

Lets be very clear, i was complaining of no such thing, i posted an article and asked for comments.

The article was complaining about that. Are you saying you disagreed with the article and that you didn't post it to echo their complaints?

Some few women have been standing up to rape, the misogynistic institutional attitude put most off. That attitude is slowly changing, the incidence of rape/abuse reporting is correspondingly increasing.

I am simply responding to your posts, i am not alone in that. And ad hom is not a good tactic, i do not show and feel any ''blind rage' how about hormones or emotions next?

It wasn't an ad hom. When you initially responded with your unwarranted and provocative assumption that I was "excusing rape" (when I was clearly not), that's what led us to this point. You yourself entitled this thread "a woman's rage," so all I'm doing is acknowledge what you yourself already admitted to. There's no shame in it; everyone has a right to feel rage.

 

[ChristineM]

The article was complaining about that. Are you saying you disagreed with the article and that you didn't post it to echo their complaints?



It wasn't an ad hom. When you initially responded with your unwarranted and provocative assumption that I was "excusing rape" (when I was clearly not), that's what led us to this point. You yourself entitled this thread "a woman's rage," so all I'm doing is acknowledge what you yourself already admitted to. There's no shame in it; everyone has a right to feel rage.

Please show where the article was complaining.

When i responded to your post, i was responding to your post, a post that explicit stated

They might wonder, "Why was she hanging out with men like that in the first place? I never raped anyone or hurt any women, so why am *I* to blame for the choices she consciously made? Why should *I* show sympathy when no one showed any sympathy for me when I was beaten and humiliated and all those mean girls laughed about it and rubbed salt in my wounds?"

The thread title is a direct lift from the title of the article. You are seemingly making that personal.

 

[David T]

I still cannot judge Ford or Kavanaugh.
Too little info.
But I believe that both have endured horrors, albeit of different kinds.
Both get my sympathy, without it being about "deserve".

I was just stating how i would have dealt with it. I have never ever remotely caused anyone to make that kind of claim against me. On the other hand i have encountered agressive females when i was younger.

 

[Audie]

Great analogy. But people who don't want to understand will never understand. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.

Boys get raped,it is not unusual.

I guess men will get beaten and raped in jail.

I wonder if that is a hard thing for (some)
men to see as being equivalent. More so
than getting kicked, I'd think.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

Man Perfectly Explains Women’s Rage Today Using Brutal Analogy So That All Men Can Finally Understand It

Author A.R. Moxon has recently invited all men to participate in an exercise of empathy. He reframed women’s experiences with assault and sexual violence and presented it in a way that most guys should comprehend…

Man Perfectly Explains Women’s Rage Today Using Brutal Analogy So That All Men Can Finally Understand It​

Comments?

Does it help you guys understand?

The neatest analogy I've heard recently is "Imagine a gay man aggressively hitting on you, even after you've told him you're not interested. That's how women feel"

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Speaking of liars, Jimmy Bennett said Asia Argento "raped " him. which imo is not even mechanically possible that a woman "rapes" a man

Nonsense. Women can certainly rape males. Or do you think erections are something you can control? Female rape victims have orgasms at tines, so I guess they were really enjoying themselves, right? (Knowing you, you probably would think they enjoyed it then.)

Regardless, Argento committed statutory rape so she broke the law and has shown herself to be a sickening hypocrite, completely destroying her public image. I hope her career suffers, too. Poor Tony. I believe Jimmy Bennett. Hell, it's not even a matter of belief since she already admitted to having sex with him in those texts before lying to the media and saying she didn't. She's changed her story multiple times.

 

[Debater Slayer]

This thread reminds me that some on RF understand gender-related issues as much as a middle schooler understands quantum physics. Of course, the chauvinistic and subtly venomous comments are never so complete as when they are accompanied by the "Not All Men" choir.

 

[Revoltingest]

This thread reminds me that some on RF understand gender-related issues as much as a middle schooler understands quantum physics. Of course, the chauvinistic and subtly venomous comments are never so complete as when they are accompanied by the "Not All Men" choir.

Are you in the "all men" choir then?

OK, the obligatory mischievous question having been asked....
You decry venom, & then toss the same at the nebulous "Not All Men choir".
It seems a double standard.

 

[Debater Slayer]

So, no. This is feminazi BS.

Whoever convinced you that this thread was titled "kindergarten-level slurs" was mistaken. Perhaps you might want to review your words so that they don't come across as thoughtlessly venomous--unless, of course, that's what they actually are.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Are you in the "all men" choir then?

I don't think I need to answer that.

You have people who reject overgeneralizations, and then you have instances where people will assume an overgeneralization exists where there is none. The latter is a rather solid way of derailing discussions and making them all about a certain group (in this case, men) and their perceived sensibilities.

 

[Revoltingest]

I don't think I need to answer that.

You have people who reject overgeneralizations, and then you have instances where people will assume an overgeneralization exists where there is none. The latter is a rather solid way of derailing discussions and making them all about a certain group (in this case, men) and their perceived sensibilities.

So you don't allow for different inferences & understandings....it must be intentional derailment?
That's a whole lotta judgement for one who hasn't participated in the thread until arriving to do
naught but dis men.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

Are you in the "all men" choir then?

OK, the obligatory mischievous question having been asked....
You decry venom, & then toss the same at the nebulous "Not All Men choir".
It seems a double standard.

"Not all men choir" = "feminazi BS" in terms of venom? Please.

 

[Revoltingest]

"Not all men choir" = "feminazi BS" in terms of venom? Please.

I don't understand this post.
But I'll say that it's best for all to avoid both terms in this discussion.

 

[ChristineM]

Well, yeah, as analogies go, it was rather weak. That's why I thought there might have been a more apt analogy; rape is a crime of violence of the strong against the weak, so the male equivalent might be a stronger male violently attacking a weaker male. The OP thought that meant "excusing rape," which was so far off base.

No, the OP thought your post was excusing rape, as pointed out twice.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

You may very well be correct, but the idea of kicking men in the groin to "make them understand" doesn't really help the problem. A lot of men do understand, but if women want good men to help them against other men who are scumbags, they need to know exactly what they're asking for. The OP implies that men don't really understand other men, which is a crock of BS. Of course, men understand other men. It goes with the territory.

I agree that, within the vast majority, men do understand other men, for sure.

However - the OP doesn't imply that men don't understand other men, I don't think. It is all about whether or not men understand the actual perspective of women. And some of us try - but we are only ever able to up to a certain point because we aren't women, of course. So it is quite impossible to understand fully. Just as it is impossible for women to fully understand what it is like to be a man. And the only people who have had a taste of both experiences have had completely different experiences than your average man/woman altogether. And there's not a single way around that.

So, in the end, who do you think is the foremost authority on what it's like to be a woman? Isn't it women? Therefore, if women strongly find this analogy to be helpful in explaining their collective position, who are we men to say the analogy doesn't hold?

 

[Shad]

It is not about topical American politics or she said, he said, but it is about providing a way for some men to understand a woman's view of the real and physical sexual abuse that is rampant in today's society. Seems some can see that without being kicked in the nuts, some can learn it compares well and some just cannot comprehend.

The author, of the article, was not able to make the point without reference to Kav, Senators nor other politics and politicians. The author opened the door to those subjects in relation to this rage hence I commented upon the misplaced rage I saw played out due to Kav and the circus. And I am not wrong about this.

 

[ChristineM]

The author, of the article, was not able to make the point without reference to Kav, Senators nor other politics and politicians. The author opened the door to those subjects in relation to this rage hence I commented upon the misplaced rage I saw played out due to Kav and the circus. And I am not wrong about this.

Ok, if you say so

 

[Shad]

Ok, if you say so

It is in the article. If the author didn't want to involve politics the author should have limited the subjects. Hence I commented on projection and the hysteria seen during Ford/Kav hearing and it's results. Believe Ford became Believe Women thus a projection from individual to collective or group. Heck now Dems are going use the Ford/Kav hearing for mid-terms by feeding off the hysteria and projection for votes.