Women and sexism.

[Lyrian Oligarchic Royal Empire]

Rape is classified as someone engaging in physical non-consensual sexual activities.

Ta da!

Is groping rape then? I fear that you may disproportionately punish people with that definition.

Create classifications based on simple factors, and leave enough blank space for the higher courts to clarify.

Killing with malice aforethought: Murder 1
Killing in the heat of the moment: Manslaughter

Gropey-gropey: Rape 2
Forced intercourse: Rape 1

Having sub-categories to pick up the slack fixes a lot of the main issues, and stops the "STARE RAPE LOCK HIM UP FOR FIVE THOUSAND YEARS" nonsense.

[Lesser Qing]

I agree. It should be changed again, but personally I wouldn't know how to word it, but I digress.

The envelopment or penetration of a sexual organ without the consent of the victim, or penetration of the mouth or anus by a sexual organ without the consent of the victim.

What about a Man being forced to have oral sex with a woman (vagina-mouth)

[Gauthier]

I cited even male victims, and I just said the truth: 99% perpetrators are males.

question:

A man is drunk or high to the point he is passed out or nearly so.

A woman comes in, coaxes him into an erection via manual stimulation, and rides him to her heart's content. He doesn't even have enough cognizance to know what's going on.

Rape or not rape?

Using personal anecdote to ask questions like that on the internet? Definitely won't tempt fate.

[Ostroeuropa]

The envelopment or penetration of a sexual organ without the consent of the victim, or penetration of the mouth or anus by a sexual organ without the consent of the victim.

What about a Man being forced to have oral sex with a woman (vagina-mouth)

I would think that's covered under the definition I provided, but expanding it to be sure is fine with me too.

[Stormwind-City]

However, there is porn of "femdom" where usually a group of women sexual abuses a man. Granted, the pornography industry was founded with a male market in mind, but women are a growing group that is beginning to take an interest in watching pornography and trying to demonize women who want to express and explore their sexuality is counter-productive in freeing them from the hard set gender roles we have in society.

Do you think that depicting a group of women sexually abusing a man is realistic and healthy? It's a good depiction of women? That's really what we need to fight sexism? That is the real solution to counter rape culture, depicting women raping men? Really?
No, I don't think it is.
Nor is "teach men not to rape": that's good, but not enough.
1)We should outlaw any message in movies and tv shows that could be interpreted as a "male-dominating-women", we should mandate that any woman should be portrayed as an independent and strong person. In the plots any sexual advance by men should be avoided, and women should be depicted to fully handle their own interests towards men or women.
2)We should remove naked women from movies, magazines, tv shows, etc. because they're only promoting the idea that "a woman is just only a sexual object".
3)We should incentive males being hired in server positions, i.e. waiters, in order to show to the society that men can be service-oriented exactly as women are.
3)We should incentive males willing to work in teaching or in child care, so we'll not have anymore women enforced into the "mommy" mindset.
Pointing out we have a "rape culture" isn't really helpful and could be even counterproductive: basically you're telling to rapists (please note: "rapists", not "men") that they're just only a part of the current culture, and by doing so you're just "normalizing" the issue.

1) In any situation of social interaction one party will always have more power than the other in some way. Mandating all women must be portrayed a certain way in film is fucking ridiculous. What if the premise of the story is based on acting a certain way? Like in historical dramatizations? Stopping men from hitting on women in plots? What? So women can handle their interests but men can't? Double standard much?
2) Remove all naked men or overly masculine men from the same things then. Because if naked women enforce the idea of them being a sexual object then musclebound, masculine, "tough guys" who get the girls promote the stereotype that men must be masculine in every way or be deemed inferior to reproduce.

So now that you want to destroy having characters in film and TV let's see what else you have.
3) Oh. How do you plan to incentivize them? Money or bonuses? So you would willing create wage gapes between sexes to eliminate inequality?

[Dread Lady Nathicana]

Question (followed by commentary):

Why is it that society appears to be so hung up on micromanaging all the problems that exist out there, and separating us all into little boxes that further divide us, and do more to create negative feelings about one another, than deal with the actual issues?

We are all people. We all get to deal with one another on a daily basis. We all deserve to be treated with common decency, and a lack of discrimination, violence, etc. It shouldn't matter what color we are, what gender we are, what religion we are, who we love, or anything else.

And in doing so, we all have to compromise to a reasonable degree in order to allow for reasonable freedoms, along with reasonable treatment of one another. I remain baffled as to why such a simple concept seems to have escaped the system, the government, the various advocacy groups, and all the rest.

The more divisions we make, the further divided we'll become.

[Lyrian Oligarchic Royal Empire]

Question (followed by commentary):

Why is it that society appears to be so hung up on micromanaging all the problems that exist out there, and separating us all into little boxes that further divide us, and do more to create negative feelings about one another, than deal with the actual issues?

We are all people. We all get to deal with one another on a daily basis. We all deserve to be treated with common decency, and a lack of discrimination, violence, etc. It shouldn't matter what color we are, what gender we are, what religion we are, who we love, or anything else.

And in doing so, we all have to compromise to a reasonable degree in order to allow for reasonable freedoms, along with reasonable treatment of one another. I remain baffled as to why such a simple concept seems to have escaped the system, the government, the various advocacy groups, and all the rest.

The more divisions we make, the further divided we'll become.

Because tackling the larger issues of inequality and lack of freedoms requires a lot of fine print. You can't build a society based solely on the macro view without leaving enough holes to collapse the entire structure.

[Galloism]

question:

A man is drunk or high to the point he is passed out or nearly so.

A woman comes in, coaxes him into an erection via manual stimulation, and rides him to her heart's content. He doesn't even have enough cognizance to know what's going on.

Rape or not rape?

That's rape, of course.
The man was drunk: he couldn't give informed consent.

Question:
It's just an invented example (or maybe a dream), or it's a really happened case?

According to the CDC, adult men being made to penetrate without their consent happened 1,267,000 times in the given year, 2010. 80% of the time, the perpetrators are only women (The other 20% is either men or a combination of men and women). The CDC, by definitional fiat, redefined it as "made to penetrate" under "other sexual violence" - not rape.

By comparison, 1,270,000 adult women were raped in the same period, with 93% of the perpetrators being men (with the other 7% being women or a combination of men and women).

In short: your previous 99% figure was a flat out lie.

[Galloism]

question:

A man is drunk or high to the point he is passed out or nearly so.

A woman comes in, coaxes him into an erection via manual stimulation, and rides him to her heart's content. He doesn't even have enough cognizance to know what's going on.

Rape or not rape?

Using personal anecdote to ask questions like that on the internet? Definitely won't tempt fate.

Just trying to determine if Chess is lying or definitionally sexist.

[Lyrian Oligarchic Royal Empire]

Using personal anecdote to ask questions like that on the internet? Definitely won't tempt fate.

Just trying to determine if Chess is lying or definitionally sexist.

Por que no los dos?

[Aidannadia]

That's rape, of course.
The man was drunk: he couldn't give informed consent.

Question:
It's just an invented example (or maybe a dream), or it's a really happened case?

According to the CDC, adult men being made to penetrate without their consent happened 1,267,000 times in the given year, 2010. 80% of the time, the perpetrators are only women (The other 20% is either men or a combination of men and women). The CDC, by definitional fiat, redefined it as "made to penetrate" under "other sexual violence" - not rape.

By comparison, 1,270,000 adult women were raped in the same period, with 93% of the perpetrators being men (with the other 7% being women or a combination of men and women).

In short: your previous 99% figure was a flat out lie.

You know, that is way more common than it should be, for all parties involved. Not even I thought that men were made to penetrate that much.

Rape is vile. I don't understand why it still happens.

[Lyrian Oligarchic Royal Empire]

According to the CDC, adult men being made to penetrate without their consent happened 1,267,000 times in the given year, 2010. 80% of the time, the perpetrators are only women (The other 20% is either men or a combination of men and women). The CDC, by definitional fiat, redefined it as "made to penetrate" under "other sexual violence" - not rape.

By comparison, 1,270,000 adult women were raped in the same period, with 93% of the perpetrators being men (with the other 7% being women or a combination of men and women).

In short: your previous 99% figure was a flat out lie.

You know, that is way more common than it should be, for all parties involved. Not even I thought that men were made to penetrate that much.

Rape is vile. I don't understand why it still happens.

Power, culture, primal instincts, misguided love, anger....

The list goes on. We're a flawed species, but we're all we've got.

[Chessmistress]

That's rape, of course.
The man was drunk: he couldn't give informed consent.

Question:
It's just an invented example (or maybe a dream), or it's a really happened case?

http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/ ... ulted.html


"A recent analysis of BJS data, for example, turned up that 46 percent of male victims reported a female perpetrator."

couple that with the rape parity things, and a quarter of rapes, ish, are performed by women.
That's just reports. Men aren't very likely to report their rape.
Some are even encouraged to be happy they've been raped and will get angry if you point out it was rape.

That article is by Hanna Rosin, an anti-feminist who negate the existence of patriarchy and oppressive structures, and wrote a book about the fact that - according her - women are dominating society
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00D9TA4VY/?tag=slatmaga-20

In such site there are even rape apologists who oppose yes-means-yes law
http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/ ... forts.html

[Lyrian Oligarchic Royal Empire]

http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/ ... ulted.html


"A recent analysis of BJS data, for example, turned up that 46 percent of male victims reported a female perpetrator."

couple that with the rape parity things, and a quarter of rapes, ish, are performed by women.
That's just reports. Men aren't very likely to report their rape.
Some are even encouraged to be happy they've been raped and will get angry if you point out it was rape.

That article is by Hanna Rosin, an anti-feminist who negate the existence of patriarchy and oppressive structures, and wrote a book about the fact that - according her - women are dominating society
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00D9TA4VY/?tag=slatmaga-20

In such site there are even rape apologists who oppose yes-means-yes law
http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/ ... forts.html

You do enjoy using loaded terms, don't you.

Debate should be a bit more fleshed out, you're still sloganeering.

[Chessmistress]

Using personal anecdote to ask questions like that on the internet? Definitely won't tempt fate.

Just trying to determine if Chess is lying or definitionally sexist.

It seems in both cases I'm wrong, right?
Not very fair.

[Galloism]

Just trying to determine if Chess is lying or definitionally sexist.

It seems in both cases I'm wrong, right?
Not very fair.

Then don't make statements from on high that are only true if you're a sexist.

[Ostroeuropa]

Symptoms of an Imperialist Matriarchy:
Womens lives are more valued than mens.
Women are capable of freely expressing their preferences while men are constrained to a gender role.
Education is controlled by women.
Household finances are controlled disproportionately by women.
Women disproportionately control the discourse on gender power relations.
Womens violence is socially approved. They may beat their lessers, and should their lesser retaliate, the state will ride in to reinforce them.
Governance is regularly rated on how well that government has served women.
High social, sexual, economic, or physical costs for confronting Matriarchal dominance of society, or for not conforming to it's expectations.
Social violence, or physical violence occurs for those challenging the dominant ideologies of Matriarchy, Feminism and Gynocentric Traditionalism.

Cognitive dissonance is expected of males in order to dissuade argument. No matter what their stance, they are always wrong. They must treat women as their betters and as their equals at all times. Pull out their chairs. Pay for their meals. And nod enthusiastically when they say they are just as capable at things as you are. Two plus two will always be five.

The Matriarchy is Imperialist because it installs native males in high offices to govern on it's behalf. Those males are removed from office if they do not adhere to one of the dominant ideologies of the matriarchy.
This is why men occupy the bottom of society, and the top of society, with a vast middle class female administrator class in the middle.
Men who attempt rebellion against the matriarchy face social and physical violence from women, and from collaborator males, who will be rewarded for their efforts so long as they toe the line and constantly defer to women.


This is an example of why I think using "Patriarchy" as the source of mens problems is just fucking stupid.
It's just sexism in society, that's all.
You can point out all the ways in which men dominate society, and all the ways women do, but it doesn't actually change shit.
This is why I think when feminists talk about "Patriarchy" being the problem for men they're just talking nonsense.
Is Matriarchy a problem too?
I've defined it right there.
Do you deny it exists!? Clearly, the matriarchy is an ever present evil which causes sexism in society, it must be stopped.

[Lesser Qing]

It appears that the FEMEN issue is above her. Very well. Only male rapists and non radical-feminist women are allowed to be criticized

[Gauthier]

Using personal anecdote to ask questions like that on the internet? Definitely won't tempt fate.

Just trying to determine if Chess is lying or definitionally sexist.

Or is a straw feminist.

[Galloism]

Just trying to determine if Chess is lying or definitionally sexist.

Or is a straw feminist.

That is probably true in either case.

[Lesser Qing]

http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/ ... ulted.html


"A recent analysis of BJS data, for example, turned up that 46 percent of male victims reported a female perpetrator."

couple that with the rape parity things, and a quarter of rapes, ish, are performed by women.
That's just reports. Men aren't very likely to report their rape.
Some are even encouraged to be happy they've been raped and will get angry if you point out it was rape.

That article is by Hanna Rosin, an anti-feminist who negate the existence of patriarchy and oppressive structures, and wrote a book about the fact that - according her - women are dominating society
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00D9TA4VY/?tag=slatmaga-20

In such site there are even rape apologists who oppose yes-means-yes law
http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/ ... forts.html

So any article by an anti-feminist is biased, but something written by the Forced Feminization guy is ok. Double standards much?

[Chessmistress]

It appears that the FEMEN issue is above her. Very well. Only male rapists and non radical-feminist women are allowed to be criticized

What is the FEMEN issue? Link, please?

Or is a straw feminist.

That is probably true in either case.

Then you don't need to ask, right?
Strawman, again.
Also, I can't get the meaning of your question, if both answer led to the same conclusion...

So any article by an anti-feminist is biased, but something written by the Forced Feminization guy is ok. Double standards much?

It was an article by Jezebel...

[The Empire of Pretantia]

It appears that the FEMEN issue is above her. Very well. Only male rapists and non radical-feminist women are allowed to be criticized

What is the FEMEN issue? Link, please?

That is probably true in either case.

Then you don't need to ask, right?
Strawman, again.

Do you even know what that word means?

[Nerotysia]

However, there is porn of "femdom" where usually a group of women sexual abuses a man. Granted, the pornography industry was founded with a male market in mind, but women are a growing group that is beginning to take an interest in watching pornography and trying to demonize women who want to express and explore their sexuality is counter-productive in freeing them from the hard set gender roles we have in society.

Do you think that depicting a group of women sexually abusing a man is realistic and healthy? It's a good depiction of women? That's really what we need to fight sexism? That is the real solution to counter rape culture, depicting women raping men? Really?
No, I don't think it is.
Nor is "teach men not to rape": that's good, but not enough.
We should outlaw any message in movies and tv shows that could be interpreted as a "male-dominating-women", we should mandate that any woman should be portrayed as an independent and strong person. In the plots any sexual advance by men should be avoided, and women should be depicted to fully handle their own interests towards men or women.
We should remove naked women from movies, magazines, tv shows, etc. because they're only promoting the idea that "a woman is just only a sexual object".
We should incentive males being hired in server positions, i.e. waiters, in order to show to the society that men can be service-oriented exactly as women are.
We should incentive males willing to work in teaching or in child care, so we'll not have anymore women enforced into the "mommy" mindset.
Pointing out we have a "rape culture" isn't really helpful and could be even counterproductive: basically you're telling to rapists (please note: "rapists", not "men") that they're just only a part of the current culture, and by doing so you're just "normalizing" the issue.

So essentially you want to implement a totalitarian state. Good, it's nice you've admitted this.

[Chessmistress]

What is the FEMEN issue? Link, please?



Then you don't need to ask, right?
Strawman, again.

Do you even know what that word means?

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.p ... +Arguments

Strawman Arguments (I call them Stickman Arguments, sometimes) are arguments in which someone who you are debating takes your points and twists them to get ground on you in order to form a refutation in which they are correct.
Person A: *Signs on to start a topic saying:* For anyone out there who questions God because God doesn't always answer your prayers, the truth is: God doesn't help us because we have free will.

Person B: That's an unsound argument because it has no ground to stand on and it is overused. It's like saying, "What if I'm right and you're wrong and you go to Hell?" to an atheist.

Person A: We're not talking about Hell, therefore your refutation has no grounds.

Person B: Please take your strawman arguments somewhere else

Person A: You're going to burn in Hell for not believing in God!

Person A signs off.

Exactly the purpose of the question of Galloism, as pointed by himself.