Everyday Sexism by Females

[Riverwolf]

Do you believe it's fair to expect a party to freely give out, from their own sweat and toil, to a group of people who they don't believe deserve it?

Why wouldn't women by default deserve the same recognition and socio-political status as men, for the simple crime of being female?

The thing is, women have been supressed for many years, as also blacks, what I have noticed is that when someone is supressed, in time it all turns the other way. Women then become the stronger, as also blacks, and it goes around and around, until someone which is mature see's what is happening, and drops all this crap, for tic for tat. If this neurotic behaviour continues, it will then turn back to where it started.

Except the turn-around that you describe hasn't happened, in either case.

 

[psychoslice]

Why wouldn't women by default deserve the same recognition and socio-political status as men, for the simple crime of being female?



Except the turn-around that you describe hasn't happened, in either case.

Of course its starting to happen, most men have lost their rights to their own children, if you haven't noticed !.

 

[Riverwolf]

Of course its starting to happen, most men have lost their rights to their own children, if you haven't noticed !.

A problem that has the same root as the stuff women have to put up with just for being female, and that feminists are trying to fight.

Besides, I doubt most men have had custody battles. I haven't, and not a single one of my male friends has, either. 'Course, none of us have children.

So... yeah, I'm calling hyperbole.

 

[psychoslice]

A problem that has the same root as the stuff women have to put up with just for being female, and that feminists are trying to fight.

Men also have to put up with being a man, it works both ways, its not a one-way street, it may have been in the past, but not now.

 

[Riverwolf]

Men also have to put up with being a man, it works both ways, its not a one-way street, it may have been in the past, but not now.

It doesn't work both ways equally at all.

I haven't had to put up with even a fraction of the stuff ALL my female friends have had to deal with. Most I had to worry about was being a fan of Sailor Moon.

We're not the egalitarian utopia we've been taught we are.

 

[psychoslice]

It doesn't work both ways equally at all.

I haven't had to put up with even a fraction of the stuff ALL my female friends have had to deal with. Most I had to worry about was being a fan of Sailor Moon.

We're not the egalitarian utopia we've been taught we are.

That's what you see, I don't see that myself, who are you really defending ?.

 

[Riverwolf]

That's what you see, I don't see that myself, who are you really defending ?.

If I see different than what you see, how, then, can either of us be sure that our perceptions are correct?

I haven't seen firsthand all the truly horrible stuff that reportedly happens to women, either. Should I then believe it doesn't happen?

 

[Estro Felino]

Yes, they do. On a very, very regular basis.

so you admit that the percentage of the 95 % was not that exaggerated, wasn't it?

 

[psychoslice]

If I see different than what you see, how, then, can either of us be sure that our perceptions are correct?

I haven't seen firsthand all the truly horrible stuff that reportedly happens to women, either. Should I then believe it doesn't happen?

So there you are, there is no need to even say anything here.

 

[freethinker44]

I haven't seen firsthand all the truly horrible stuff that reportedly happens to women, either. Should I then believe it doesn't happen?

Well, yeah. At the very least you should be skeptical of it. One example is the notion that women walk around in constant fear of being raped, but if you do the math it turns out this fear is totally irrational. If they are worried about rape, statistically they are safer in a subway or dark alley with a stranger than they are at home or at a friends house.

So yeah, be skeptical. A healthy dose of skepticism isn't going to hurt anything, the truth is true whether we believe it or not.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

Well, yeah. At the very least you should be skeptical of it. One example is the notion that women walk around in constant fear of being raped, but if you do the math it turns out this fear is totally irrational. If they are worried about rape, statistically they are safer in a subway or dark alley with a stranger than they are at home or at a friends house.

So yeah, be skeptical. A healthy dose of skepticism isn't going to hurt anything, the truth is true whether we believe it or not.

I attribute this to cultural conditioning. A woman is seen as responsible if she takes what society sees as the necessary pre-cautions to avoid being sexually assaulted at frat parties or in dark alleyways. The myth of stranger rape being the more common occurrence affects everybody, not just misogynists.

You are correct, in that victims of rape and sexual assault experience the crime much more commonly statistically from people they know/trust. And also, statistically, it is why the VAWA is a good start to protecting those who are most targeted for assault/battery and murder (statistically women). As the stories of male victims surface more and more, there should be a foundation of victim protection by law for all in domestic violence and partner violence.

 

[freethinker44]

And also, statistically, it is why the VAWA is a good start to protecting those who are most targeted for assault/battery and murder (statistically women).

That's a myth too.

Homicide rate for men is four times higher than the rate for women.
http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/hus11.pdf

And men and women are victims of violent crimes in general at about the same rate, although it's higher for men by .1%.
http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv13.pdf

So statistically, we don't need a violence against women act, we need a violence against men act, but the egalitarian in me would rather see a violence against people act. There is no reason to exclude one gender.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

That's a myth too.

Homicide rate for men is four times higher than the rate for women.
http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/hus11.pdf

And men and women are victims of violent crimes in general at about the same rate, although it's higher for men by .1%.
http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv13.pdf

So statistically, we don't need a violence against women act, we need a violence against men act, but the egalitarian in me would rather see a violence against people act. There is no reason to exclude one gender.

I was addressing your argument about the stranger rape narrative, and that statistically, women are sexually assaulted at much higher rates than men within a partner setting.

The VAWA includes this gap as part of it's necessity.

This does not dismiss the concern for the overall gap in homicide rates, though we'd have to include other factors in that the highest are male, black, and young. But the VAWA does address the gap in assault and battery, partner homicide/suicide, and sexual assault within a partner setting.

 

[Smart_Guy]

Isn't battery something used with some electronic devices to give them energy to run?

 

[freethinker44]

Isn't battery something used with some electronic devices to give them energy to run?

That's crazy talk.

Electronic devices don't run, they just sit there.

 

[freethinker44]

I was addressing your argument about the stranger rape narrative, and that statistically, women are sexually assaulted at much higher rates than men within a partner setting.

And this statistic isn't surprising at all. I mean, until 2012 the FBI didn't even consider male rape a crime. Why would you keep statistics about a crime that isn't technically a crime? Of course women would have much higher rates. But again, if we do the math it turns out that the rates of sexual assault are pretty close, if I remember correctly it's about 16% for men and 20% for women.

 

[At The Left Hand ov God]

A problem that has the same root as the stuff women have to put up with just for being female, and that feminists are trying to fight.

Besides, I doubt most men have had custody battles. I haven't, and not a single one of my male friends has, either. 'Course, none of us have children.

So... yeah, I'm calling hyperbole.

As someone who's been through a custody battle, it's like a warzone.

 

[Smart_Guy]

That's crazy talk.

Electronic devices don't run, they just sit there.

Cars use batteries yet they don't just sit there

 

[Riverwolf]

so you admit that the percentage of the 95 % was not that exaggerated, wasn't it?

I was talking about the "usually", not the percentage.

Considering how much likely goes unreported or unrecognized, I don't think we can have a clear percentage.

So there you are, there is no need to even say anything here.

There is no such need if I consider the only source worthy of any trust at all is my own experience.

Luckily, I'm not inclined to be so limited.

Well, yeah. At the very least you should be skeptical of it. One example is the notion that women walk around in constant fear of being raped, but if you do the math it turns out this fear is totally irrational. If they are worried about rape, statistically they are safer in a subway or dark alley with a stranger than they are at home or at a friends house.

So yeah, be skeptical. A healthy dose of skepticism isn't going to hurt anything, the truth is true whether we believe it or not.

Statistics and logic do not diminish a fear that's reinforced by media.

Besides, the sort of back-alley rape we see in movies is actually a relatively uncommon form of it. The majority of rapes are committed by someone the victim knows, and generally occur in a situation of perceived safety.

And furthermore, I've come to a hypothesis that in the majority of rape cases, the rapist does not realize that he or she has committed rape.

After all, you saying I should be skeptical of it because I've not personally experienced it, is akin to saying I should be skeptical of the fact that war happens at all, or to the degree it does, because I've not personally experienced it.

And this statistic isn't surprising at all. I mean, until 2012 the FBI didn't even consider male rape a crime. Why would you keep statistics about a crime that isn't technically a crime? Of course women would have much higher rates. But again, if we do the math it turns out that the rates of sexual assault are pretty close, if I remember correctly it's about 16% for men and 20% for women.

Considering the population numbers, that difference of 4% is incredibly significant.

In 2010, the US population was about 300,000,000. 16% of that is 48,000,000, while 20% is 60,000,000. That's a difference of 12,000,000: close to the total population of New York and Los Angeles for that year.

Not even remotely "pretty close."

Besides, the fact that rape that happens to men isn't really regarded is also rooted in the same things feminism is fighting against. You're basically preaching to the choir.

 

[Riverwolf]

As someone who's been through a custody battle, it's like a warzone.

I meant in terms of degrees of occurrence, not the severity of the experience. Trust me: I have no intention of downplaying the severity of custody battles, or the importance of the fact that they tend to favor the mother over the father because "women are the nurturers, and men can't be nurturing."

I was basically nitpicking the claim that most "men" have to deal with it, when even most "fathers" would have been inaccurate.