Why are all men implicated in a "rape culture"?

65% Normal
57 Comments

First off, I am a man and see rapists as nothing other than scumbags that belong in a prison. I think that the average guy would probably agree that rape is not acceptable or anything other than a felonious crime and a horrendous act. So, then how is it that all men are implicated in a "rape culture" when most are not rapists and do not sympathize with rapists. The rapists themselves may be part of a culture of rapists and may even associate with others who commit rape and be part of a "rape culture". However, most men are not rapists and do not hang around with (known) rapists so therefore they have nothing to do with that culture. I think its highly unfair to lump all men in with heinous sex offenders. I in no way have any sympathy whatsoever for sex offenders of any kind and I think they should either go to prison forever or better yet have a seat in a comfy and electrifying chair. This making out of men as part of a "rape culture" of some kind is extremely misled. I have never heard a man say anything regarding rapists other than that they belong in jail or should get "fried". Even in prison, rapists are at the bottom of the totem pole because even hardcore criminals generally don't want to be associated with them.

Voting Results
65% Normal
Based on 17 votes (11 yes)
Help us keep this site organized and clean. Thanks!
[ Report Post ]
Comments ( 57 )
  • [Old Memory]
    9 years ago

    I must always wonder whether or not I'm dealing with someone who's actually well-read in the multifaceted subject of 'feminism' whenever they declare themselves to be 'anti-feminist'.

    https://www.rainn.org/get-information/statistics/sexual-assault-victims

    http://www.rapecrisis.org.uk/mythsampfacts2.php

    You can continue to find reasonable sources on your own, but the stats here seem to conclude that a number of women have experienced sexual-assault sometime in their life. 'Rape culture' has less to do with men being solely responsible for it's propagation (women can also support it), and more to do with changing the erroneous attitudes held by people in society that rape is somehow the fault of the victim or that the victim should simply learn to protect themselves (they actually do take precautions, and some still get raped), rather than try to make changes in the way that our society views rape.

    Rape culture is purported to effect members of all sexes, genders, races, etc., and it would probably help for one to actually figure out what it is and what it entails before deriding it, especially since those who complain that it 'demonizes' men (that word is really popular in antifeminist circles), would actually have to find more ammo to support their whole 'feminists only think men rape bla bla,' considering that 'rape culture' also has a negative influence on men as well (that men who are raped in prison are often ignored and even treated as though they deserve it ('blaming the victim') and the notion that rape isn't something that can happen to a man (unless he doesn't fit what our culture considers 'masculine') are products of rape culture. It's not just a woman's issue and attempting to shoot it down based on the fact that it hurts people's feelings to acknowledge that their demographic might contain some disgusting pricks who feel entitled via culture to treat rape victims differently based on superficial criteria will by no means assist anyone in this argument.

    http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Rape_culture#Addressing_the_.22not_all_men.22_defense

    here's a decent article.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    3
    3
      -
    • [Old Memory]
      9 years ago

      I would say the same about feminists that look at anti-feminists.

      For example, when it comes to rape or sexual assault statistics you need to realize that sources like the ones you link pick and choose what consists as rape. For most studies forced envelopment of the penis is not considered rape, and the legal definition until recently (not sure if it's still the case or not because some studies add such methods of rape in to them and the outcome is different), only forced to penetrate, so a lot of the time female rape methods are not considered. It also doesn't specify who is raping who at certain percentages, such as male and female rapists or people that sexually assault.
      It also doesn't specify that men are around 80% less likely to come forward about their victimization.

      For example, when adding prison rape and males raped by women, even the prison rape statistic alone shows that men make the majority ov rape victims.

      As a male I have had to go through life being treated by women (and two homosexual guys, however women far more) as they say women do, and I have seen guys treated the same. I think a large issie with it is that it gives the impression that onl women go through this or a very small minority of men do, so it gives a whole "males do this, women endure it" look rather than it being both ways and not simply in the case of straight people.

      The whole idea that people blaming the woman for rape as an epidemic is just ridiculous. Yes, there are bound to be some people that do this, however they are a very, very, very small minority of people, I have had arguments with some pretty misogynistic people and even they didn't think such things. The problem people have with feminism in that aspect is that they exaggerate too much, like many other issues.

      "Learn to protect themselves."
      This is another issue people have with feminism in saying that women should learn to protect themselves...The view it as wrong. Be truthful, if society agreed to teach people not to rape, then expanded it to teach people not to commit crimes of any sort, would you feel comfortable with not having a police force? I would assume your answer would be no. Why no? Because you don't think people will care if they're taught not to do something and will still do it? Well, that's the case with society now, and it is why we should teach people to protect themselves, everybody, because these people exist and no amount of "teaching" is going to change their ways, so the only way to lessen the chance of you being a victim is to have ways to protect yourself. That is not blaming the victim and it is not a belief held exclusively to the issue of sexual assault.

      Another issue I have with "rape culture" is the name. Most of the things that comes under "rape culture" has nothing to do with rape, so all it does is try to use the negative views of something to make everything in the category of rape culture seem bad on the same level, it's ridiculous.

      Comment Hidden ( show )
      -1
      -1
        -
      • [Old Memory]
        9 years ago

        Do you ever source any of your assertions? By any chance, will I be forced to look at some article or other approved of by the likes of Karen Straughan, Typhon Blue, et al?

        "only way to lessen the chance of you being a victim is to have ways to protect yourself."

        http://www.rapecrisis.org.uk/commonmyths2.php

        Read the article; I feel like it didn't sink in. Also, if you have nay practical advice beyond such vague statements as 'learn to protect yourself,' I'm all ears.

        "The whole idea that people blaming the woman for rape as an epidemic is just ridiculous. Yes, there are bound to be some people that do this, however they are a very, very, very small minority of people, I have had arguments with some pretty misogynistic people and even they didn't think such things. The problem people have with feminism in that aspect is that they exaggerate too much, like many other issues."

        Really?

        http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/07/16/the-party-of-rape-culture-40-republican-rape-quotes-everyone-should-remember/

        http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Rape_apology

        If anecdotal, rather than empirical information, is to be considered allowable, then allow me to say that I am personally acquainted with more than one woman who has been blamed for her own rape. My sister would happen to be such a woman; she has numerous mental issues as a result, and sickeningly enough our own parents shifted to onus of responsibility solely upon my sister, refusing the acknowledge the creep that attempted to rape her (we later found out that she was molested at a younger age, but said nothing). Again, I can't be forced to refuse empirically gathered information regarding rape in favor of your anecdotes.

        "The problem people have with feminism in that aspect is that they exaggerate too much, like many other issues."

        Oh, I'm sorry, I must have missed the part where anti-feminists were whinging about 'false-rape accusations' (occurs no more often than other false-imprisonments) and were devoting entire websites, Youtube channels, and other such venues almost expressly for the purpose of whining about how much those dirty feminists whine. You know, about rape, women making less money than men, domestic violence, women being passed up for promotions, etc. It's not that big a deal!

        "For example, when it comes to rape or sexual assault statistics you need to realize that sources like the ones you link pick and choose what consists as rape. For most studies forced envelopment of the penis is not considered rape, and the legal definition until recently (not sure if it's still the case or not because some studies add such methods of rape in to them and the outcome is different), only forced to penetrate, so a lot of the time female rape methods are not considered. It also doesn't specify who is raping who at certain percentages, such as male and female rapists or people that sexually assault.
        It also doesn't specify that men are around 80% less likely to come forward about their victimization.

        For example, when adding prison rape and males raped by women, even the prison rape statistic alone shows that men make the majority ov rape victims."

        It's like you didn't even read anything I posted.

        Comment Hidden ( show )
        2
        2
          -
        • [Old Memory]
          9 years ago

          Make a list of the points you want me to prove and I'll link sources.

          My comment about protecting yourself still stands. By learning to protect yourself you can learn to fend off rapists, use weapons (pepper spray), ensure your drinks are not unattended, and so on. How exactly does your link refute my point about protecting themselves would lessen the chance of successful rape?

          I wouldn't take this article seriously, as I explained this is one of those pages that view rape as a thing a woman cannot commit by forcing envelopment of a penis, and this is shown at the end when it states, and I quote:
          "Only a man can commit the offence of Rape [Sec 1 (1) SOA 2003] as the penetration has to be with a penis. However, both women and men may experience rape. If the penetration is with something other than a penis, then the offence is assault by penetration. See Rape and the Law section."

          Rape epidemic:
          I have no time to go through and refute every point on this, so I will just target the credibility of the two links which should give why your point is wrong.
          "Rape is terrible. Rape is awful. Is it made any better by killing an innocent child? Does it solve the problem for the woman that’s been raped? We need to protect innocent life. Period."
          This has nothing to do with condoning rape and everything to do with life. I am pro-choice, however understanding their perspective is key here. They are not being a rape apologist, they are trying to, in their mind,, save a life that is at risk due to their life being made by a terrible act. It's not condoning the rape, just saying that all unborns deserve a chance. I am opposed to pro-life, somewhat, however using low tactics as to apply pro-lifers to rape apologists is just disgsutingly low.

          That said, yes, really. Your links prove nothing about it being an epidemic, even if those 40 people quoted were rape apologists, they are only 40 people, that would not make it an epidemic. That said, not everything on that list condones rape, it's ust trying to extend a negative they disagree with and attach the negative stigma of rape apology on to it, as my example shows.

          " I am personally acquainted with more than one woman who has been blamed for her own rape."

          Allegation or proof? Information and accusations are not the same thing. If this person told you that they were raped and there is no proof, then you can't say she was raped and expect others to think the same. If your parents believed she was raped and blamed it on her, the're terrible people, it still doesn't proe of it being an epidemic.

          False rape allegations happen. Some studies even suggest half of rape cases are false allegations when they done a study on it and detrimined validity of each claim with DNA evidence. That said, the issue people have with false rape allegations is because it can and has destroyed entire lives and the ones responsible don't even get half the punishment, the fact that men can be destroyed by a mere allegation of it and how his identity is not hidden until proven guilty.

          "Women make less money than men".
          Well, this is why they "whine" (how you put it). It's already been proven wrong that women are paid less due to sexism but feminists still convince people it's true.

          "Domestic violence".
          When a former feminist that was responsible for the first women's shelter changes from a feminist to an MRA because she noticed how men are unfairly treated when it comes to domestic violence and nobody wants to help them, I think it speaks volumes. That said, men make almost half of domestic violence cases, arguably the majority as they make half and yet 80% less likely to come forward than women, and yet they have less than 10% of shelters that are for them.

          So, no, its not a big deal, because what you claim is not a deal at all.

          "It's like you didn't even read anything I posted".

          I did...And I even quoted one of the sources you posted that proves it.

          Comment Hidden ( show )
          0
          0
            -
          • [Old Memory]
            9 years ago

            "When a former feminist that was responsible for the first women's shelter changes from a feminist to an MRA because she noticed how men are unfairly treated when it comes to domestic violence and nobody wants to help them, I think it speaks volumes. That said, men make almost half of domestic violence cases, arguably the majority as they make half and yet 80% less likely to come forward than women, and yet they have less than 10% of shelters that are for them."

            Don't tell me - Erin Pizzey? You mean the woman who claimed that feminists killed her dog, but then went back on her story and claimed she didn't know if the people who shot her dog were feminists and that her dog didn't actually die? Sounds legit.

            I don't know if you're an MRA or not, but you should know the claims that feminists routinely demonize those who speak about males suffering DV are not only lacking feasible evidence to back them up, but are made by people who, as demonstrated by the fact that Erin Pizzey can't keep her stories straight, are prone to lying, distortions, and using cherry-picked data to make their claims, and sometimes don't even read the sources they cite for such claims. This reminds me of a video GWW made in which she claims to prove that feminism is a hate movement via quoting various 'feminists' making outrageous claims; the only problem being that most of these people aren't feminists and any amount of searching in regards to this commonly-deployed talking point would prove this assertion to be false. I've known people (I think JordanOwen tried to make this argument, as well as VictorZen) who have tried to discredit feminists by bringing up the radicals like Dworkin and Brownmiller (most feminists today claim that these women have done more harm than good, and that they are too radical for today's standards), while trying to make the assertion that because these people who were heavy-hitters once in the movement have ideas that are still considered relevant by some, that this discredits feminism entirely. Fair enough, but if that's the case, we'll just bring up the fact that John Hembling of AVFM has lied about his heroic deeds about saving rape victims and fighting off mobs of feminists with box-cutters, and we'll also mention that Warren Farrell has claimed that incest can be a good thing for children and their parents. It may not be germane to the rest of his message, but hey, turnabout's fair play, I guess. I'm actually reasonably well versed in MRA/MGTOW arguments (watched Thunderfoot, GWW, Stardusk, Justicar, et al.) because I sort of used to be one, but considering how much of their ideas are based on biological determinism, and how they bash feminists for intellectual dishonesty while they continue to tell whoppers-of-lies themselves really kind of turned me off. The Dunning-Kruger effect really comes to mind when I think of these people.

            "Women make less money than men".
            "Well, this is why they "whine" (how you put it). It's already been proven wrong that women are paid less due to sexism but feminists still convince people it's true."

            Did you get this from Warren Farrell, by any chance?

            http://www.theglasshammer.com/news/2009/02/05/the-wage-gap-puzzle-in-the-legal-profession-why-women-lawyers-still-earn-less-than-men-what-can-be-done-about-it/

            http://www.weforum.org/issues/global-gender-gap

            http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/personalfinance/2012/10/24/gender-pay-gap/1652511/

            Even when you take into account factors that those who appose the notion that a gap exists, women still earn roughly 90-95 cents for ever dollar men make, even women who are unmarried and without children; ? Sure, the 77C for every dollar is the favorite of every politician who wants to curry favor with voters, but the fact still stands that women are unfairly paid less.

            "For example, when adding prison rape and males raped by women, even the prison rape statistic alone shows that men make the majority ov rape victims."

            This also proves that men are the majority of offenders. In regards to your implications that feminists are somehow responsible for female-on-male rape or simply don't think it's possible, or that men simply don't come forward with that kind of thing;

            http://forums.sherdog.com/forums/f54/edit-pic-russian-black-widow-raped-released-10-men-998627/

            Gee, I wonder how many of those guys expressing envy are feminists?

            http://www.thelocal.se/20130110/45536

            Because feminists are all about demonizing 'gay men'.

            http://blogs.houstonpress.com/hairballs/2011/05/hot_female_sex_offenders.php?page=3

            I wonder if feminists are responsible for this list also?

            http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/12/texas-10-hottest-female-sex-offenders_n_861331.html

            http://msmagazine.com/blog/2011/05/13/houston-press-lists-ten-hottest-sex-offenders/

            http://jezebel.com/5801241/worst-listicle-of-all-time-hottest-female-sex-offenders

            Women don't commit rape, amirite?

            More:

            http://everydayfeminism.com/2014/03/examples-of-rape-culture/

            http://feministing.com/2013/01/31/the-dangers-of-a-gender-essentialist-approach-to-sexual-violence/

            First you claim that rape-culture is just hysteria and that no such thing exists, then you talk about the numbers of men who have been raped but refuse to say anything because they feel ashamed or because our patriarchal dudebro culture acts like men should be glad that such things are happening to them (a fucking perfect example of how rape culture effects men); which is it?

            Comment Hidden ( show )
            1
            1
              -
            • [Old Memory]
              9 years ago

              Yep, Erin Pizzley. Given she was having a lot of negative attention from feminists at the time, it's rational to assume feminists may of been responsible for what she claimed, just as it was rational for that girl that was attacked after her MRA protest assumed it was an MRA.

              I never stated feminists demonized men who were victims of domestic violence. Feminists do, however, cause problems when groups try to talk about male issues, as you can see from the speech for men and boys' issues (women were also welcome) at the university of Toronro, as feminists broke the law and violated human rights. I am sure you have seen that video.

              That said, I don't get my sources from MRAs, like ou are implying it could be bias.

              "The only problem being is that these people are not feminists." I love when feminists say that, whenever someone from their own ideology says something extremely wrong morally, all of a sudden "No, they weren't one of us!" Yet will claim Elliot Rodgers was an MRA when there was no proof.

              I have yet to hear a feminist take issue with Dworkin and Brownmiller at all on any stance.

              That said, those aren't my reasons for opposing feminism, I know full well that radicals don't speak for a movement.

              About the whole Warren Farrel thing, when I see his accusations I tend to take a step back, however when I further dwell in to it (like how he is a rape apologist, etc) his comments tend to be taken extremely out of context. So, if you can show me where he does this, I will be happy to concede to it if it is the case.

              No, not Warren Farrel. As I previously stated, I do not get my sources of information from bias aspects unless I have already found information from non-bias sources and then what they state is in concideration of that information I found from non-bas sources.

              There's articles and research online, one would be from PayScale, but overall there are multiple articles that give sources to their information that you can find online.

              Comment Hidden ( show )
              0
              0
          • [Old Memory]
            9 years ago

            In regards to finding sources, Karen Straughan repeatedly makes reference to some conspiracy supposedly uncovered by Earl Silverman in which the numbers of male and female domestic abuse victims are added together and the sum is used instead to reflect the number of female DV victims; unfortunately, she almost never seems to source any of this information, and I can find it neither here nor there. If you have any information regarding this, sources would be greatly appreciated.

            Comment Hidden ( show )
            0
            0
              -
            • [Old Memory]
              9 years ago

              I watch some of Karen's videos but not all of them, and usually she does source them either in the description or briefly mentions where she gets it from.

              That said, I never claimed her belief on the subject is that of my own, so I am not sure on your point here.

              My question was what sources do you want to see.

              Comment Hidden ( show )
              0
              0
  • SecretIdentity
    9 years ago

    To ItDuz:

    (continued from earlier discussion)

    Opinions are personal judgements and cannot be determined right or wrong.

    Facts are indisputable.

    Opinions are not facts and facts are not opinions. Now that that's cleared up....

    I asked you to link a debate that you feel proud of so that I could see what you consider a quality exchange. This is not a debate, it's just a conversation that you have taken to a strange level.

    My post didn't show up lastnight, I said so at the time. I rewrote it and reposted and both posts showed up just now, 9+ hours later. So, yes, they are virtually identical but I was not intentionally repeating myself. It was due to technical difficulties on the part of the website.

    The reasons why I, and likely others as well, do not reply to some of your 'points' is that they are often so irrational, nit-picky, off topic or are just excuses for you to make insults. But if I must; yes, you did sort of admit to having bad grammar. So? Do you want a medal? I mean, you barely admit to it and have no understanding of how badly you write. You go on and make numerous excuses such as "well, people eventually get what I'm saying so that's all that matters". Well, no.

    I never claimed to have superior intelligence or grammar. Don't know why you acted as if I did.

    You really shouldn't pepper your 'debates' with personal attacks.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    2
    2
      -
    • [Old Memory]
      9 years ago

      "Opinions are personal judgements and cannot be determined right or wrong."

      Unless those opinions do not consider facts that put those opinions to shame. Trying to say opinions cannot be wrong is just absurd. Are you trying to imply that people have opinions only in areas where there are no "facts"?

      "I asked you to link a debate that you feel proud of so that I could see what you consider a quality exchange."
      This is the same way I have my debates with others, this is what I would consider something that comes under a debate, however if that is a loose term for a debate or incorrect to be seen as a debate, then I would say it is a discussion. I think a debate would mean having two opposing sides discuss an issue and offer points to defeat the opposing points and position. The definition of debate involves having an audience which I would assume being in a public site would come under having an audience, and so on. Pretty much the difference between a discussions and debates from what I do is that I don't do it in a confrence or think vote determines validity.

      "Technical difficulties."
      Alright. It happens.

      "The reasons why I, and likely others as well, do not reply to some of your 'points' is that they are often so irrational, nit-picky, off topic or are just excuses for you to make insults. But if I must; yes, you did sort of admit to having bad grammar. So? Do you want a medal? I mean, you barely admit to it and have no understanding of how badly you write. You go on and make numerous excuses such as "well, people eventually get what I'm saying so that's all that matters". Well, no."

      Ah, alright...So you put yourself in the arbiter status when coming to discussions. I think the exact same thing about your "points", I still take the time to refute them and explain why they are wrong or not accurate which is what you are 'supposed' to do...I'm sorry that you think "I don't like this point because of my 'opinion'" on them, thereby I am not burdened to prove my point or refute yours, therefor I win *sticks tongue out*".

      Sorry, dearie, but you don't get to take that arbiter status. You put out or get out. For someone that is apparently understanding of how debates work, you sure have a weird way of showing it. I imagine your idea of winning one would be saying "Well, I say your points are stupid, there for I win" and flip the table over and walk through the middle with your middle finger up and think at the end "yeah, I showed them" while everyone that witnissed it just asks "Is she serious?"

      "You admitted to having bad grammar, so?"
      It was to make an example that when I am givin criticism with good reason, I accept it. It was in response to your idea that I am close-minded in thinking I am wrong because I think I am "always right".
      So you try make a point against me, I use an example to show it's not the case, now you try to mock me for using a point that shows yours to be wrong? You mock people that give valid points of proving you wrong? Grand.

      "I mean, you barely admit to it and have no understanding of how badly you write."
      I admitted to it straight when you stated it and admitted I was wrong by using the wrong word. That is not "barely" admitting to it, that is me accepting it; there's room to improve on it.
      You trying to say that my grammar is extremely poor is an exaggeration, and my point on people understanding me fine is a valid point to it. If it was as bad as you claim it is, people would not understand what I am saying and respond to me in context to what I am saying.
      So let's see your response to that point I brought up, shall we?
      ...
      ...
      ...
      ...Oh...No? Just like that? No need for a counter point, just your word on it? There's that arbiter complex of yours, ofcourse it falls apart when I don't accept you as the arbiter of the discussion. Sorry, but if you think points can just be dismissed with you saying "no", then you're just being moronic.

      "I never claimed I have suprior intelligence or grammar."
      It's implied, very clearly I may add, and in the grammar aspect you are. If you're dictating what is and what isn't when it comes to intelligence and grammar, then you are clearly showing that you believe you are superior to the person in those aspects enough to inform them of them being wrong in them or lacking them...I didn't think this would need explained given the big talk you give.

      "With personal attacks".
      I see them more so as criticisms and obervations, whether or not you take them as personal attacks is your choice.

      I like how you choose to not respond to all of my point like I do yours, though. I am sure you will chop it up to "Oh, I think they are too stupid to address" rather than admitting I refuted your arguments and that you saying something is wrong makes it so, but sorry to say, that won't fly with rational people. Either you have accepted my points to refute yours which is why you did not address those, probably the majority of my response (I do that), or you simply can't refute them but still want to give the impression you can, you just don't want to (lovely ten year-old mentality). So I'm curious why you miss out so much of my rebuttals? Any of the two the reason? I expect this to happen again and again, as it has happened with each point you make and each one I address.

      I think you have too much pride to match your capability to discussing something with me as an opposition, and I think this discussion is proving that. Just know that it's most likely not going to change, I'll find ways to oppose your arguments with accuracy until you probably make some excuse not to take part all while trying to convince yourself that you "proved him wrong".

      You're either going to have to improve your capability to beat me here or just give up on it, dearie.

      Comment Hidden ( show )
      0
      0
        -
      • SecretIdentity
        9 years ago

        You have to accept that opinions, by the very definition and nature, are not right or wrong. Poorly formed? Perhaps, but never right or wrong.

        I'll just list your good and bad qualities when it comes to debate:

        Good: you show full confidence in your stance Bad: you take it to the point of arrogance and infallibility

        Good: you provide information, links etc, to support your position Bad: you seem to get most/all your information and talking points from biased sources and generally do not have a thorough understanding of it

        Good: you want to spread a cause Bad: you are not a good representative for any cause due to how you present, speak (write), insult and drone on and are often misinformed or lack sufficient knowledge on the topic

        What you need to improve:

        In debate, NEVER throw insults! Your points should speak for themselves.

        Be brief! Make your point quickly and clearly.

        Know your subject inside and out.

        Step into the shoes of your opponent, judge and audience.

        Write/speak clearly.

        Vocabulary. Expand it!

        Don't bury a point in a sandwich of personal, irrational mumbo jumbo. It could be an excellent point but if you shove it inside a load of manure then it ends up stinking.

        So, you admit to bad grammar and you ecpect that to prove that you accept deserved criticism? OK, I understand however it really means nothing.

        Comment Hidden ( show )
        2
        2
          -
        • SecretIdentity
          9 years ago

          "You trying to say that my grammar is extremely poor is an exaggeration, and my point on people understanding me fine is a valid point to it. If it was as bad as you claim it is, people would not understand what I am saying and respond to me in context to what I am saying."

          How do you know it's an exagerration? You have astonishingly poor writing ability. Do people who are terrible at reading and writing judge essay contests? No. Why do you think that is, and how do you think this applies here?

          If you're going to claim to be good at debate then you can't at the same time be terrible at a fundamental aspect of said activity. It's simply not acceptable to think "they get it even if it's difficult to decipher". You should be ashamed of this and not be making excuses for it.

          Comment Hidden ( show )
          1
          1
            -
          • [Old Memory]
            9 years ago

            By definition opinions are views not based on knowledge or fact, not views on subjects that there are no facts on. So yes, opinions can be wrong. Saying an opinion can't be wrong is, well, wrong.

            Now is the part where you just go through me personally. Great.

            "Good: you show full confidence in your stance Bad: you take it to the point of arrogance and infallibility"

            If I can argue my point and it can't be refuted, then it's not arrogance, unless you can be arrogant in the validity of your arguments...

            "Good: you provide information, links etc, to support your position Bad: you seem to get most/all your information and talking points from biased sources and generally do not have a thorough understanding of it."

            Says who? You? I wouldn't say I get my information from bias sources, infact I actually avoid places that would have a bias on it for that reason. Regardless, information from a bias source does not mean the information is false by default.

            "Good: you want to spread a cause Bad: you are not a good representative for any cause due to how you present, speak (write), insult and drone on and are often misinformed or lack sufficient knowledge on the topic."

            Good representative: I have had people, pages, and groups wanting me to take part in writing in them due to how I can address new points and do their view, with enough skill to communicate. I rejected those few (not saying I get many) due to the fact I never claimed I am a good representative, simply good at using rationality.
            Point being: I never claimed I would be a good representative.

            Insult: I have restraint, I simply choose not to do so in certain spaces or towards certain people. When someone is being civil, I return the favor.

            "Often misinformed or lack sufficient knowledge on a topic."
            Says you. Again, you've got an arbiter complex.

            What I need to improve:
            Well, like you said, this isn't a debate, and if what we are doing now is also not a debate then what I have done here with others are also not debates, so you are judging my debating skills with only experiencing how I discuss or argue with people, not debating them.

            Be brief: That depends on the amount of time given. This is the internet and is not a live feed, so you have just as much time to make your point as I do because we have all the time in the world rather than a set time limit for how the debate lasts. Being brief would be required in debates with a time limit, not with debates with no time limit.

            Know your subject inside and out: If this was the case there would be no debates, everyone would come to the same conclusion and debating would be pointless because if everyone knew the same on a subject debated inside and out, nobody would be able to refute the other as they would of both known the subject "inside and out", hence why they debate, one knows about the subject more than the other and that is decided in the debate.

            Step into the shoes of your opponent, judge, and audience:
            Opponent: Why? To understand their perspective? That doesn't change the fact of them being wrong, stepping in to the shoes of someone else who is wrong is pointless.

            Judge: I need to improve this? Excuse me, but when was I ever in a position on here where someone was in the "judge" position? Nobody on here holds that position or have had that position in the discussions I have had, therefor you cannot tell me to "improve" on something that you have never observed happening.

            Audience: Depends on who is the audience and I repeat my judge point.

            Comment Hidden ( show )
            0
            0
              -
            • [Old Memory]
              9 years ago

              Write/speak clearly: You haven't seen me speak, so again you have no grounds to support you in your criticisms.
              Write: Writing perfectly and writing clearly are not the same thing. My writing still gets what I am saying understood. Yes, I should improve as much as I can when it comes to my writing, however it is not necessary if what is said is still understood.

              Vocabulary: Again, aslong as the meaning is clear, it doesn't matter how it is presented.
              ______________________________________________________________

              Next comment.

              "How do you know it's an exagerration? You have astonishingly poor writing ability. Do people who are terrible at reading and writing judge essay contests? No. Why do you think that is, and how do you think this applies here?"
              Repeat what you quoted from me. People can understand me clearly, therefor my grammar is not "astonishingly" poor, just not great.
              To be a judge on something you have to hold full knowledge of that something, that doesn't mean that someone that is not to the same level to the point of knowing everything of that subject makes them extremely terrible at that something, which your point suggests. You have a black and white view here, which is what your point suggests "If you cannot be the judge of a certain subject, then that means you are extremely terrible at that subject, there is no levels of knowledge inbetween".
              Ergo, you're wrong.

              "If you're going to claim to be good at debate then you can't at the same time be terrible at a fundamental aspect of said activity. It's simply not acceptable to think "they get it even if it's difficult to decipher". You should be ashamed of this and not be making excuses for it."

              So you would say the fundemental aspect of a debate is perfect literature? Well, I would disagree. I would argue that aslong as your message can be understood, which mine can, then it's acceptable. If you value someone's side based on their literature rather than their side that is still understandable, then I would say that is one of the things you need to improve on, among other things.

              Again, you avoided most of my previous points. For someone lecturing me aboud debate, would that be acceptable in one? I would say not, as would most.

              See, you view the literature aspect of debating above the sending of information and points, where as I am the opposite. If you judge someone's validity based on their communication skills to the point that it justifies not taking their points seriously, then you are closing off new information due to that. Unlike you, I know some people aren't great at grammar, however I know that they may still have the rationality and ability to prove me wrong, so aslong as their message is easy to understand, I have no problem with it, because information is more important than the presentation of that information, and those that aren't able to wrap their present better than someone else does not mean that the present inside the wrapping is more valuable than the better wrapped present.

              Comment Hidden ( show )
              0
              0
    • ThisIsImpossible
      9 years ago

      Y'all some windbaggin muhfuhkas hahaha

      Comment Hidden ( show )
      0
      0
  • thegypsysailor
    9 years ago

    When the man hating fem libbers have nothing better to do, they invent shit that lumps all men into another of their uber-prejudiced categories.
    It would be so nice if these women would follow the Jews and build a country of their own and take their hateful ways and ideas far, far from the rest of us civilized humans.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    2
    2
      -
    • Anonymous Post Author
      9 years ago

      Agreed. Instead of lumping all men into one category of a "rape culture" wouldn't it make sense to devote substantial police time and funds into arresting the actual rapists and putting them behind bars where they belong. By catching these criminals, the streets would be much safer for women. Also, I think that most guys would be glad to see the sexual offenders caught and in jail. I doubt many people would miss them much

      Comment Hidden ( show )
      -1
      -1
        -
      • thegypsysailor
        9 years ago

        Jail is NOT the proper punishment for rape; surgical sterilization is. A permanent and effective solution.
        Without the physical ability to rape, these monsters would not be a threat to women any longer, and would not have the ability to pass on their sickness to another generation.

        Comment Hidden ( show )
        -1
        -1
          -
        • [Old Memory]
          9 years ago

          And without hands people wouldn't be able to steal, either. You also have to consider that some people are falsely accused.

          Comment Hidden ( show )
          0
          0
  • [Old Memory]
    9 years ago

    "Rape culture" isn't only rape related. It involves "cat calling", "Objectification of women", etc.

    As much as I find the theory/idea of it ridiculous and moronic, it's good to understand it properly before criticizing it.

    Feminists are prone to blaming men or society for everything. You need to remember that they gain money out of their movement, and so they have to constantly find new ways to convince people why they are needed or their money goes. Not saying that there aren't people that simply believe in it, there are, they would be the majority.

    It's a bad idea to try and rationalize what feminists think because there is no rationality in their beliefs, and onl the simple minded and the "poor me" type of people will agree with them.

    They also use the word "rape" in it when most of the things they claim that are part of "rape culture" do not involve rape at all, they use it as an impact words and it ptretty much trivializes what rape is.

    But yeah, I wouldn't take what feminists state on the matter to heart. Anyone that has a normal level of rationality can pick their arguments apart.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    1
    1
  • dom180
    9 years ago

    I think anyone who says all men are part of "rape culture" is part of the loud, wrong minority. Anyone who says this is probably too lacking in perspective to have made valid conclusions.

    I think "rape culture" is an unhelpful, deliberately provocative term. Even though I think the phenomenon it describes has some grounds in "reality", the term does not accurately describe what the phenomenon is which leads to a lot of confusion. Few people have an academic approach to understanding the nature of society and culture, which makes it kind of hard to use words like "rape culture" and have yourself instantly understood.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    1
    1
  • green_boogers
    9 years ago

    Hateful lesbians see all heterosexual sex as rape. They were conceived because their father raped their mother. Lesbian sex is virtuous and fun. It's a mindset that deludes them into thinking they are normal when, in fact, they are immature troublemakers.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    1
    1
  • ThisIsImpossible
    9 years ago

    Maybe you're hanging out with too many lonely 50 year old women or opinionated 20 year old women's studies majors?

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    1
    1
  • Avant-Garde
    9 years ago

    As if women can't be rapists too. Women can also be "scum", just like their male counterparts are Touted to be.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    0
    0
  • [Old Memory]
    9 years ago

    I don't know where you're getting your information from but I've never heard anyone say all men are apart of 'rape culture'.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    0
    0
      -
    • [Old Memory]
      9 years ago

      You haven't? What's your diet? Is there any way your daily rituals differ from the majority? I need to know so that I don't have to see the idiots that state these things, which you seem to be able to avoid.

      Comment Hidden ( show )
      1
      1
        -
      • [Old Memory]
        9 years ago

        I pretty much eat and do whatever I want. I'm guessing it's just women that claim men are associated with rape. Maybe you are around judgmental man hating women? Fortunately I do not know any and if I did I would not be interested in spending time with them. I have different kinds of idiots in my life to deal with such as tweakers and bad house guests.

        Comment Hidden ( show )
        0
        0
          -
        • [Old Memory]
          9 years ago

          Alright, I'm as anti-feminist as they get, but I don't like "women" and "feminism" being used as if they are mutually exclusive. By saying "women" when you mean "feminist" is giving them the power they want; to represent all women. They don't have the right to represent women, and I don't think using women and feminism as if they are mutually exclusive helps show that to feminists, rather gives them a feeling of accomplishment.
          I used to think they were mutually exclusive, but they're not. There are male and female feminists, however not all women agree with feminists and many prominent anti-feminists are women, and most women do not agree with feminism.

          Not getting at you here, if that is the impression. Like I said, I used to do the same thing, but I wouldn't say "women" in place of "feminist", as explained, men are feminists too and feminists and women are not mutually exclusive.

          :)

          Comment Hidden ( show )
          0
          0
            -
          • SecretIdentity
            9 years ago

            Your misuse of 'mutually exclusive' is hilarious!

            Comment Hidden ( show )
            1
            1
          • [Old Memory]
            9 years ago

            I agree there's a difference. By women I meant that this doesn't seem like something men would be saying (that men are associated with rapists). I didn't think most women thought this way because the women I know do not.

            Comment Hidden ( show )
            1
            1
  • lolol555
    9 years ago

    I don't think it's that all men are involved in it, it's more the "patriarchy" or something... Which was apparently founded by white male supremacy or some shit. Idk. I can't remember.

    But, anyway, ignoring that, I thought the "majority" view of those that agree that rape culture exists wasn't that it was all men but sort of society itself? Like, the idea that women can't go out at night without avoiding people's gazes, wearing even slightly provocative clothing, avoiding drinking anything they haven't made themselves at a party/bar, whatever. Which, tbh, I guess is fair. Women do have to watch out for those things but so do most people really (though, I suppose, less so).

    But, on the other hand, men can get raped too. It's not just women. So, in a way, it can be worse for them when they are suffering trauma thanks to rape because people tend to have an idea that "men can't get raped" and there are very few support places if you're a male raped victim. So, in reality, both sexes have a lot of disadvantages when it comes to a horrible act such as sexual assault.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    0
    0
  • KeepsakeDoll
    9 years ago

    Because of generalization.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    0
    0
  • VirgilManly
    9 years ago

    Did I miss something?
    Who is lumping all men into a "rape culture"?

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    0
    0
      -
    • handsignals
      9 years ago

      woman.

      Comment Hidden ( show )
      0
      0
    • Anonymous Post Author
      9 years ago

      Some friend of mine posted a link on facebook talking about rape culture and how all men are "part of it".

      Comment Hidden ( show )
      0
      0