The NationStates Feminist Thread

[New Larthinia]

Women can still rape men, Chess. It isn't that difficult to understand.

They can, but it's much more likely with boys, since men are generally much bigger and stronger than women. It's certainly something to have as a law, but, practically speaking, the chances are slim you know any men who were raped by a woman, whereas chances are you know at least one woman who was raped by a man.

So, what if women are more likely to be raped by men? That doesn't hide the fact that men are also exposed to being raped. For example, there have been many male students raped by their teachers.

[Galloism]

Women can still rape men, Chess. It isn't that difficult to understand.

They can, but it's much more likely with boys, since men are generally much bigger and stronger than women. It's certainly something to have as a law, but, practically speaking, the chances are slim you know any men who were raped by a woman, whereas chances are you know at least one woman who was raped by a man.

You know a man who was raped by a woman, and your argument about rarity is bullshit anyway - at least as it pertains to the United States.

Can you show the math for that? My previous analysis of the CDC data led me to believe that it was more like 5-10%.

Well, you've got to account for the fallibility of memory - even in serious things. Just ask Bryan Williams.

Your memories tend to be edited to match your self image over time, and ones that don't match are buried. Your self image - what it means to be you - is molded greatly by society. Men are told they cannot be victims, so many edit memories so they aren't.

In the 2010 study (which you've seen), approximately the same number of men were made to penetrate in the last 12 months as women were raped. Almost 80% of the victims reported ONLY a female perpetrator - that's about 40% of the total (if one is nonsexist and includes made to penetrate as rape). In that study, while 1,267,000 was the estimate for males made to penetrate in the last 12 months, only 5,451,000 reported in their lifetime. Some have disingenuously tried to insist the lifetime numbers are more accurate - despite memory degrading over time.

I'm sure you're familiar with this link.

Now, what's interesting is that there was a study in 2011. The 2011 study used slightly different definitions, which changed the numbers, but what's terribly interesting is what the ratio of comparison was. For the previous 12 months, 1,929,000 women were raped, while 1,921,000 men were made to penetrate. Almost the same numbers in the 12 month section - again. In the lifetime section, 7,610,000 men were made to penetrate (along with 703,000 women), while 23,305,000 women were raped (along with 1,971,000 men).

Again, among men made to penetrate, about 80% (82.6% to be precise) reported only female perpetrators.

We have a pattern now - that male victimization is about the same as female year after year, but the lifetime numbers continue to be wildly disparate. This means one of a few things:

1) Memory is really bad, and men repress memories over time in accordance with societal expectations.
2) A small group of men are being raped by women repeatedly.
3) Suicide is so high among male rape victims, that it depresses the lifetime numbers.
4) The Disparity exists among children (people under 18). The survey doesn't cover them.
5) Some combination.


Number 3 is pretty unlikely. I think we would have noticed these massive numbers of suicides. Number 2 is also fairly unlikely, although it is possible. Repeated victimization of the same people is somehow even worse. That leaves 1, 4, or 5.

Source for your perusal.

[Royal Hindustan]

Whatever happens, sex robots will be made. Maybe the liberal Scandinavians will ban them (or promote them, God knows anymore), or the holier than thou states will ban them, but there are too many companies which are strong and too many willing buyers. In Japan alone, a significant amount of young men are becoming hermits. A sex robot means no worry about consent, thus no worry about rape. Also a sex robot can't have STD's, it doesn't require emotional attachement, and unlike a relationship, is a one time expense.

[USS Monitor]

They can, but it's much more likely with boys, since men are generally much bigger and stronger than women. It's certainly something to have as a law, but, practically speaking, the chances are slim you know any men who were raped by a woman, whereas chances are you know at least one woman who was raped by a man.

You know a man who was raped by a woman, and your argument about rarity is bullshit anyway - at least as it pertains to the United States.

Well, you've got to account for the fallibility of memory - even in serious things. Just ask Bryan Williams.

Your memories tend to be edited to match your self image over time, and ones that don't match are buried. Your self image - what it means to be you - is molded greatly by society. Men are told they cannot be victims, so many edit memories so they aren't.

In the 2010 study (which you've seen), approximately the same number of men were made to penetrate in the last 12 months as women were raped. Almost 80% of the victims reported ONLY a female perpetrator - that's about 40% of the total (if one is nonsexist and includes made to penetrate as rape). In that study, while 1,267,000 was the estimate for males made to penetrate in the last 12 months, only 5,451,000 reported in their lifetime. Some have disingenuously tried to insist the lifetime numbers are more accurate - despite memory degrading over time.

I'm sure you're familiar with this link.

Now, what's interesting is that there was a study in 2011. The 2011 study used slightly different definitions, which changed the numbers, but what's terribly interesting is what the ratio of comparison was. For the previous 12 months, 1,929,000 women were raped, while 1,921,000 men were made to penetrate. Almost the same numbers in the 12 month section - again. In the lifetime section, 7,610,000 men were made to penetrate (along with 703,000 women), while 23,305,000 women were raped (along with 1,971,000 men).

Again, among men made to penetrate, about 80% (82.6% to be precise) reported only female perpetrators.

We have a pattern now - that male victimization is about the same as female year after year, but the lifetime numbers continue to be wildly disparate. This means one of a few things:

1) Memory is really bad, and men repress memories over time in accordance with societal expectations.
2) A small group of men are being raped by women repeatedly.
3) Suicide is so high among male rape victims, that it depresses the lifetime numbers.
4) The Disparity exists among children (people under 18). The survey doesn't cover them.
5) Some combination.


Number 3 is pretty unlikely. I think we would have noticed these massive numbers of suicides. Number 2 is also fairly unlikely, although it is possible. Repeated victimization of the same people is somehow even worse. That leaves 1, 4, or 5.

Source for your perusal.

I'm guessing the wonky statistics are a result of people handling their memories differently, e.g. men who were "made to penetrate" putting it out of their minds and not immediately recalling it when surveyed.

There is also a pattern among people of both sexes where people that have been victimized once are more likely to have it happen again. It came up when Shellby was here and we had the rape thread. She was talking about how she kept getting harassed by creepy guys, and she felt like she had some kind of sign on her forehead or target on her back telling them to go after her, and someone posted a link with statistics. I can't think of a good reason why this would be more extreme for male rape victims, but as you said, it is possible.

[United Marxist Nations]

Valerie Solanas - although predictably chess claims the SCUM manifesto was satire, in spite of all evidence to the contrary. And of course there are multiple feminists out there who laud her as a hero, and the SCUM manifesto as required reading.

The SCUM Manifesto was satire. I already posted a link to it, so everybody can read it and judging it's just only satire, even quite funny.
In example in the SCUM Manifesto Solanas said that all men have a desire to become women: it seems to you a realistic thought or just satire?

And with a blatantly bullshit statement like that, there's no other conclusion than the account is a Red Pill straw feminist.

Clearly all those high school teachers were fired and jailed for engaging in a legal and consenting relationship with their students. PATRIARCHY!!

First: I was wrong, and I was thinking just ony about adult men and adult women. I never negated statutory rape. I also already highlighted that I think incapacitated men CAN BE abused by women, but also that I suspect the consequences are - most times - not the same if the situation would have been reversed: I have no doubts about the fact that a drunk man who had sex with two sober women and then wake up in un unknown dirty place without his wallet and his watch can be shocked and hurted. I have some doubts about the fact that a drunk man who had sex with two sober women can be shocked if he wake up in their bed with both women smiling and giving him a coffee.

Second: according UK law adult men cannot be raped by adult women, at least not through envelope / made to penetrate - so "there's no other conclusion than the UK government is a Red Pill straw feminist"???
Why "red pill" in capital letters?

Third:

Except of course if a drunk woman takes advantage of a drunk man, the drunk man is the one charged with rape.

That statement seems to me from an MRA, not from a Feminist. At least if it's referred to USA.
In UK, technically, it's absolutely impossible that even a sober adult woman would rape a drunk adult man using envelope / made to penetrate: the very definition of "rape" prevents that.

@Valystria: the fact that Feminists had some power in Iceland, a very small country, doesn't mean Feminism is powerful all over the western world.

If your logic is that, unless the law says so, it isn't rape, I suppose you are also in favor of not recognizing marital rape in the countries where it is not legally rape?

[USS Monitor]

Whatever happens, sex robots will be made. Maybe the liberal Scandinavians will ban them (or promote them, God knows anymore), or the holier than thou states will ban them, but there are too many companies which are strong and too many willing buyers. In Japan alone, a significant amount of young men are becoming hermits. A sex robot means no worry about consent, thus no worry about rape. Also a sex robot can't have STD's, it doesn't require emotional attachement, and unlike a relationship, is a one time expense.

Consent still matters, even with a machine. We don't say no very often, but no still means no.

[Val Halla]

Whatever happens, sex robots will be made. Maybe the liberal Scandinavians will ban them (or promote them, God knows anymore), or the holier than thou states will ban them, but there are too many companies which are strong and too many willing buyers. In Japan alone, a significant amount of young men are becoming hermits. A sex robot means no worry about consent, thus no worry about rape. Also a sex robot can't have STD's, it doesn't require emotional attachement, and unlike a relationship, is a one time expense.

Consent still matters, even with a machine. We don't say no very often, but no still means no.

Sounds depressing. You buy a sex robot because you don't get sex, someone hacks said robot to say no anyway

[Maoist Britain]

I see people are still unaware that raping women is more common than raping men.

<insert Nicolas Cage meme here>

Honestly MB, if you really believe this is true, this is the stupidest thing you can believe.

You are missing the point. I never said raping males isn't impossible- I just said that it is less common. Not that much less common, mind you.

[The Alexanderians]

Whatever happens, sex robots will be made. Maybe the liberal Scandinavians will ban them (or promote them, God knows anymore), or the holier than thou states will ban them, but there are too many companies which are strong and too many willing buyers. In Japan alone, a significant amount of young men are becoming hermits. A sex robot means no worry about consent, thus no worry about rape. Also a sex robot can't have STD's, it doesn't require emotional attachement, and unlike a relationship, is a one time expense.

Consent still matters, even with a machine. We don't say no very often, but no still means no.

I thought you were a ship though not a robot?

[Wallenburg]

Consent still matters, even with a machine. We don't say no very often, but no still means no.

I thought you were a ship though not a robot?

Ships are machines...I think.

[Italios]

<insert Nicolas Cage meme here>

Honestly MB, if you really believe this is true, this is the stupidest thing you can believe.

You are missing the point. I never said raping males isn't impossible- I just said that it is less common. Not that much less common, mind you.

Raping men and women both exist. However, the main problem is that male rape doesn't get as much recognition as female rape. The problem is wildly overlooked.

[USS Monitor]

Consent still matters, even with a machine. We don't say no very often, but no still means no.

Sounds depressing. You buy a sex robot because you don't get sex, someone hacks said robot to say no anyway

Next time buy a machine that is more compatible with how you plan to use it.

[Italios]

I thought you were a ship though not a robot?

Ships are machines...I think.

Machines are "an apparatus using or applying mechanical power" so a ship with an engine would, but a sailboat or rowboat (*sigh* a boat is a small ship, as defined by the dictionary, yes I know they're different) isn't.

[USS Monitor]

Consent still matters, even with a machine. We don't say no very often, but no still means no.

I thought you were a ship though not a robot?

Machines are machines. At least when it comes to this type of issue, it does not matter if it's a ship, a robot, or a toaster.

[The Alexanderians]

I thought you were a ship though not a robot?

Machines are machines. At least when it comes to this type of issue, it does not matter if it's a ship, a robot, or a toaster.

Well the toaster just wants to bath the world in nuclear fire...
However on a serious note this does bring up the question of "could a machine properly give consent?"

[USS Monitor]

Machines are machines. At least when it comes to this type of issue, it does not matter if it's a ship, a robot, or a toaster.

Well the toaster just wants to bath the world in nuclear fire...
However on a serious note this does bring up the question of "could a machine properly give consent?"

Sure, why not?

[The Alexanderians]

Well the toaster just wants to bath the world in nuclear fire...
However on a serious note this does bring up the question of "could a machine properly give consent?"

Sure, why not?

It could be programmed to do nothing except say yes

[Italios]

Sure, why not?

It could be programmed to do nothing except say yes

Until machines get a mind of their own, that's true. Or possibly be programmed to take in the circumstances and give a yes/no answer. If they're only programmed to say just "yes" and "no" then it's not really consent.

[The Alexanderians]

It could be programmed to do nothing except say yes

Until machines get a mind of their own, that's true. Or possibly be programmed to take in the circumstances and give a yes/no answer. If they're only programmed to say just "yes" and "no" then it's not really consent.

I mean what if they develop a proper mind of their own but they still have a sub-routine that forces them to say yes when they're asked for sex? I'd imagine "Pleasure Bots" or something like that would be programmed specifically with that function.

[Italios]

Until machines get a mind of their own, that's true. Or possibly be programmed to take in the circumstances and give a yes/no answer. If they're only programmed to say just "yes" and "no" then it's not really consent.

I mean what if they develop a proper mind of their own but they still have a sub-routine that forces them to say yes when they're asked for sex? I'd imagine "Pleasure Bots" or something like that would be programmed specifically with that function.

I guess if they can't use their mind, they won't be really be giving consent, or refusing it either.

[The Alexanderians]

I mean what if they develop a proper mind of their own but they still have a sub-routine that forces them to say yes when they're asked for sex? I'd imagine "Pleasure Bots" or something like that would be programmed specifically with that function.

I guess if they can't use their mind, they won't be really be giving consent, or refusing it either.

So what, It'd be salutatory?

[Italios]

I guess if they can't use their mind, they won't be really be giving consent, or refusing it either.

So what, It'd be salutatory?

It would be automatic. Giving consent means you're giving permission or agreeing to something. It would do neither but technically not say "no" - really it could not be called "consent" unless you are in control of your mind.

[USS Monitor]

Sure, why not?

It could be programmed to do nothing except say yes

If you have a good enough grasp of human psychology, neurology, and biochemistry, you could program a human to always say yes.

[The Alexanderians]

It could be programmed to do nothing except say yes

If you have a good enough grasp of human psychology, neurology, and biochemistry, you could program a human to always say yes.

I'd question the legitimacy of the yes given in that case as well.

[USS Monitor]

If you have a good enough grasp of human psychology, neurology, and biochemistry, you could program a human to always say yes.

I'd question the legitimacy of the yes given in that case as well.

But would you question the legitimacy of all human consent simply because such a thing is possible?