The NationStates Feminist Thread II

[Costa Fierro]

As has been shown, you clearly don't understand the issues you claim to fight for.

I do.

[Neutraligon]

I don't think any person or group controls feminist "policy." And a minority within a group can still be effective at fulfilling their aims. ISIS are a minority of Muslims (not that that comparison is entirely without its own problems, but you see what I mean)

Except there is a loud outcry of muslims against ISIS and similar groups. Muslims are fighting against ISIS in large numbers.

Where's the feminist outcry against any of the above? Where are they? Why are they not speaking? Why are they not pushing back?

If you want to make me believe you exist, push back.

Too bad I am only one person.

[Mattopilos]

Let's be fair here: there is a group of feminists that want only women to be the talking point of it. I agree with there being a higher privilege for men, especially those that are white. HOWEVER, for rape statistics and domestic violence (Thanks Galloism for the data), they are not far enough apart to suggest it is JUST a woman's problem. Maybe more a women's problem, but not by enough to ignore other evidence. It needs to be a focus on all genders, and to remove privilege and the causes of rape and domestic abuse for all genders. To suggest all feminists or even MAJOR feminists want a focus on this is absurd. Some are... not so crash hot on having any focus on anything but women. Some have turned the idea of "feminism is for women' into something sacred: we must remove this sacredness.
EDIT: You are a TERF? My opinion of you continues to drop.

While I would point out that the statistics from the CDC is data from the US and isn't directly applicable to all parts of the world, I would absolutely not deny that sexual assault and domestic violence is a problem for both genders. There's different perspectives on them - for example, given that there are areas where there's a clear difference between the rate of victimization of women compared to men, it's even more important to make sure that the smaller group isn't forgotten that we actively deny their existence. As long as there are victims, no matter how many, they are entitled to support systems. We also have to examine why the group is smaller - is it because the rate of victimization is actually lower, or is it because the victims refuse to speak up and/or ask for help? This needs to be examined in every country, and steps taken to change the situation if it's the latter (which it is many places).

I agree. Better data collection and understanding of why it is being skewed (people not asking for help), and how we can assure that the problem is being dealt with effectively. I just used that data, given much of this discussion has been on feminism in the West, and America seems to be the main country of discussion on western feminism.

[Costa Fierro]

While I would point out that the statistics from the CDC is data from the US and isn't directly applicable to all parts of the world, I would absolutely not deny that sexual assault and domestic violence is a problem for both genders. There's different perspectives on them - for example, given that there are areas where there's a clear difference between the rate of victimization of women compared to men, it's even more important to make sure that the smaller group isn't forgotten that we actively deny their existence. As long as there are victims, no matter how many, they are entitled to support systems. We also have to examine why the group is smaller - is it because the rate of victimization is actually lower, or is it because the victims refuse to speak up and/or ask for help? This needs to be examined in every country, and steps taken to change the situation if it's the latter (which it is many places).

I agree. Better data collection and understanding of why it is being skewed (people not asking for help), and how we can assure that the problem is being dealt with effectively. I just used that data, given much of this discussion has been on feminism in the West, and America seems to be the main country of discussion on western feminism.

I get the feeling this is because American academics do the majority of the theorizing of these things and said ideas are exported overseas.

[Mattopilos]

I agree. Better data collection and understanding of why it is being skewed (people not asking for help), and how we can assure that the problem is being dealt with effectively. I just used that data, given much of this discussion has been on feminism in the West, and America seems to be the main country of discussion on western feminism.

I get the feeling this is because American academics do the majority of the theorizing of these things and said ideas are exported overseas.

Possibly. I am no statistician, so that could be the reason for all I know. I am sure that Europe has something similar, but I just haven't heard of it.

[Gravlen]

As has been shown, you clearly don't understand the issues you claim to fight for.

I do.

You're empirically wrong.

[Gravlen]

While I would point out that the statistics from the CDC is data from the US and isn't directly applicable to all parts of the world, I would absolutely not deny that sexual assault and domestic violence is a problem for both genders. There's different perspectives on them - for example, given that there are areas where there's a clear difference between the rate of victimization of women compared to men, it's even more important to make sure that the smaller group isn't forgotten that we actively deny their existence. As long as there are victims, no matter how many, they are entitled to support systems. We also have to examine why the group is smaller - is it because the rate of victimization is actually lower, or is it because the victims refuse to speak up and/or ask for help? This needs to be examined in every country, and steps taken to change the situation if it's the latter (which it is many places).

I agree. Better data collection and understanding of why it is being skewed (people not asking for help), and how we can assure that the problem is being dealt with effectively. I just used that data, given much of this discussion has been on feminism in the West, and America seems to be the main country of discussion on western feminism.

I know, and it sometimes annoy me how "the west" is being used to really mean "(parts of) the US" while giving the impression that we're talking about a much larger area.

[Gravlen]

I get the feeling this is because American academics do the majority of the theorizing of these things and said ideas are exported overseas.

Possibly. I am no statistician, so that could be the reason for all I know. I am sure that Europe has something similar, but I just haven't heard of it.

Swedish and French academic feminists are quite busy these days, to name just a couple. The language barriers are more likely the reasons for why the anglophone crowds are less exposed to them.

[Mattopilos]

Possibly. I am no statistician, so that could be the reason for all I know. I am sure that Europe has something similar, but I just haven't heard of it.

Swedish and French academic feminists are quite busy these days, to name just a couple. The language barriers are more likely the reasons for why the anglophone crowds are less exposed to them.

Fair enough. Language barriers suck, but I guess it is still better than it used to be before the internet, huh?

I know, and it sometimes annoy me how "the west" is being used to really mean "(parts of) the US" while giving the impression that we're talking about a much larger area.

Yeah, but I guess that comes with the whole "America is the west" mentality portrayed in most forms of media.

[The Grene Knyght]

I kind of wonder if all the debates I have on this thread come from the fact that most of the people here are from North America...

[Jello Biafra]

No. The notion that men and boys somehow "want it" is not inconsistent with rape culture. If anything, it's part of the theory.

Don't lie. Rape culture has no real definition but after a quick google search most definitions specify a culture that normalizes male on female sexual violence and while some are gender neutral none see fit to make mention of the fact that in the popular perception and even in the law rape of a male is treated as a lesser thing. Even in the most backwards "patriarchal" societies of the third world people believe men can't really be raped and women certainly can't be offenders. The discussion of rape culture does not include men as victims in any meaningful way and to say otherwise is just dishonest.

I'm aware that the discussion of rape culture doesn't include men as victims in any meaningful way. This is, in part, because of the idea that men "want it". I'm not sure where we're disagreeing here.

This is not something feminists care about.

We're discussing a study by a feminist, who looked into rapes committed by women, and published her results. Further, she asserted, correctly, that women as abusers fits into feminist theory, and it is something that should be discussed more often.

[New Edom]

Very well said. I agree completely.

I'm happy to hear that, since it must mean you've disowned your previous posts on the matter of consent. Just a reminder, when I previously have stated that men are not in a default state of consent, you've argued against it, dismissing it as a "feminist theory" and rejecting that approach to consent.

Sometime, try comparing my posts with others in this thread recently, and you'll notice that even when, say, Jello Biafra and I disagree or Grene Knyght and I disagree there is courtesy and an understanding that we're exchanging ideas. Even Chessmistress and I have more thoughtful exchagnes than I ever do with you--because she doesn't try to accuse me of being dishonest and stupid all the time, and i don't do that with her either.

If you tried this we might experience the same, but I'm not interested in exchanging anything with someone whose every post directed towards me is full of contempt. Stop trying to accuse me of lacking integrity and having no useful points to make and I may be interested in your own ideas. Otherwise this is the last response I will give to you.

[Jello Biafra]

No. The notion that men and boys somehow "want it" is not inconsistent with rape culture. If anything, it's part of the theory.

There is no definite 'theory' you speak of, so this confuses me. Maybe you mean "the view they push", but that is not the whole movement, but the part I mentioned in the comment above - the ones that 'cook the books'.

No, there is a theory of rape culture, or perhaps it would be more accurate to speak of theories of rape culture, as different feminists might have modified theories about what rape culture is - and of course, those feminists who do not believe that there is such a thing at all.

[Galloism]

I agree. Better data collection and understanding of why it is being skewed (people not asking for help), and how we can assure that the problem is being dealt with effectively. I just used that data, given much of this discussion has been on feminism in the West, and America seems to be the main country of discussion on western feminism.

I know, and it sometimes annoy me how "the west" is being used to really mean "(parts of) the US" while giving the impression that we're talking about a much larger area.

I wouldn't say "parts of", but I do want to clarify.

I rag on the CDC hard for the "men who are forced to have sex aren't raped". I think this is justified.

However, to the CDC's credit, they focus on behavioral questions rather than categorization questions. Instead of "were you ever raped", they ask "did anyone ever penetrate your vagina or anus while you were drunk, high, or passed out and unable to consent?"

I think this is really smart and probably underlies the data that seems so unusual to people. A study that asks "were you ever raped" is likely to miss a number of female victims and nearly all male victims because the victims don't self-classify that way. For women, this is probably the result of rationalization, while men are taught they have no right or ability to say no, so it's never rape and they can't be raped - at least by women.

Asking behavioral questions gets past (to an extent) these cognitive biases.

[Jello Biafra]

This awareness-raising need not come at the expense of women victimized by sexual violence, Stemple emphasized to Rosin, because “compassion is not a finite resource.”

Tell that to the feminists. It's not all feminists, but it's almost exclusively feminists who believe it's a zero sum game.

The quote from the article was said by a feminist. It was a feminist who did the study that prompted this discussion.

No. The notion that men and boys somehow "want it" is not inconsistent with rape culture. If anything, it's part of the theory.

Utter delusional bullshit. Since the term first came into existence, large and influential swathes of Feminism have repeatedly portrayed rape culture as something only perpetuated by men, and only women are the victims.

Yes, in part because of the idea that men "want it". This means that men are supposed to go out and have sex with women, and they can't be victimized by women. The idea that men "want it" was not conceived by feminists.

[Mattopilos]

There is no definite 'theory' you speak of, so this confuses me. Maybe you mean "the view they push", but that is not the whole movement, but the part I mentioned in the comment above - the ones that 'cook the books'.

No, there is a theory of rape culture, or perhaps it would be more accurate to speak of theories of rape culture, as different feminists might have modified theories about what rape culture is - and of course, those feminists who do not believe that there is such a thing at all.

That makes a little more sense.

[New Edom]

I kind of wonder if all the debates I have on this thread come from the fact that most of the people here are from North America...

There are similar debates going on in the UK, in France, in Australia, and in India. The problem is that the world has changed rapidly. Feminism is an ideology that has occupied for a long time, the main discussion of how this change should be managed, and the orthodoxy is being challenged now. I don't see this as a bad thing. The problem is that any challenge to that orthodoxy is often seen as woman hating even when it doesn't repudiate the idea that men and women should be equal.

[Jello Biafra]

The definition used by jello and myself is pretty common our side radical circles of feminism

And yet, if you look through Jello's posts, you'll find she exclusively uses rape culture to refer to things that have happened to female victims (none of which are excusable, btw), until myself or someone challenges her on it, whereupon she backs up to "well, I never SAID rape culture can't affect men. You're just jumping to conclusions."

Generally it's because the subject is about women. I have no issue with discussing things that affect men, but sometimes the things that affect women and the things that affect men have different causes and it isn't always useful to discuss them at the same time - so I usually try to keep them separate.

It's like constantly railing on the rate at which white people get murdered and screaming that violence is out of control, but then when you point out how many black people are murdered every year, them screaming "well I never SAID violence doesn't affect black people."

To be fair, I respect Jello a lot, and I don't think it's a conscious thing. It comes with the toxicity of the term and how it's been used.

Thank you, I respect you too. It's possible that I've excluded men from the discussion subconsciously at times, but in general I do it because, as I said, I think it makes sense to talk about them separately.

I don't think any person or group controls feminist "policy." And a minority within a group can still be effective at fulfilling their aims. ISIS are a minority of Muslims (not that that comparison is entirely without its own problems, but you see what I mean)

Except there is a loud outcry of muslims against ISIS and similar groups. Muslims are fighting against ISIS in large numbers.

Where's the feminist outcry against any of the above? Where are they? Why are they not speaking? Why are they not pushing back?

If you want to make me believe you exist, push back.

The study we're talking about was done by a feminist.

[The Grene Knyght]

I kind of wonder if all the debates I have on this thread come from the fact that most of the people here are from North America...

There are similar debates going on in the UK, in France, in Australia, and in India. The problem is that the world has changed rapidly. Feminism is an ideology that has occupied for a long time, the main discussion of how this change should be managed, and the orthodoxy is being challenged now. I don't see this as a bad thing. The problem is that any challenge to that orthodoxy is often seen as woman hating even when it doesn't repudiate the idea that men and women should be equal.

Well really what I meant were things like, for example, people discuss how violence against men is utterly ignored by feminists, which is so utterly outside my experience, and reading a recent report by the EU I can see why - a majority of people in my country, according to them, believe that violence against men is "common, or very common." EDIT: I should note here that, while perhaps the problems being dealt with here are not so ignored as in the US, there are still numerous issues with how they are being dealt with here. In the example used earlier, for example, violence against women is rated to be 20% (or so) more common.
Also these ideas of feminism being run by a handful of radicals - we all see on tv just how crazy american college is, and I was recently informed by an american friend that no, whats on tv isn't a huge exaggeration. So maybe american colleges are full of crazy, radical, man-hating feminists. I find that incredibly hard to believe, but I can say for sure that that sort of thing is completely outside my own experience within the feminist movement.

[New Edom]

Tell that to the feminists. It's not all feminists, but it's almost exclusively feminists who believe it's a zero sum game.

The quote from the article was said by a feminist. It was a feminist who did the study that prompted this discussion.

Utter delusional bullshit. Since the term first came into existence, large and influential swathes of Feminism have repeatedly portrayed rape culture as something only perpetuated by men, and only women are the victims.

Yes, in part because of the idea that men "want it". This means that men are supposed to go out and have sex with women, and they can't be victimized by women. The idea that men "want it" was not conceived by feminists.

Well, I'm sorry but that's dodging what Hirota is saying. It doesn't matter if feminsts invented this concept or not, and furthermore that's actually not the only reason why it's said that men can't be victimized by women.

First--feminists almost never refer to ways that women victimize others, even other women. For example even where I've read articles talking about dress code enforcement for girls that was unjustly applied, the articles rarely referred to how the women applying the code were personally unjust. The focus was on how patriarchy--men in particular--force women to dress in ways that undermine their agency. I can find several examples if you like.

Second, when feminists talk about things like sexual harassment or sexual assault they themselves don't talk about male victims or female victims of women except as a footnote. As I've said,e ven when other feminists have proposed it should be talked of more, it has not 'caught'. The preferred anrrative is about women and girls as victims of males alone.

Even when bullying by women and girls is discussed, women are not really held accountable--patriarchy is. Men are.

I think that because patriarchy is presented as ONLY being profitable for men--some men in particular--and terrible for women--never good in any way--that it is almost impossible to see anything but that women are victims and good, and men are perpetrators and bad.

Along with this is another notion that feminists rarely like to mention, that most ordinary men are considered expendable by most civilizations on earth. It is men who get sent to the hard physical labour jobs; it is men who get drafted for war. It is violence against men that is depicted as exciting or funny in movies and TV. So risks and harm to men are things we get desensitized to.

And we should not forget this: it's actually not to most men's benefit to show the same sensitivity and vulnerability that women are able to in most modern societies--when it comes to women. Feminists almost never addres women's preference for traditional behaviours from men, or the various studies surrounding this. The average man cannot help but see that women who appeal for protection get it more readily than men do; he cannot help but see that women are more attracted to men who show fewer emotional displays and are very purposeful and appear strong.

So there are complexities surrounding this issue. Feminists don't do much to challenge it. And in a way I could care less if they don't--but I do mind if they establish societal expectations that are almost impossible to fulfill and governments support them. Feminists may not have started all this, but when they tryt o shut down men's groups just because they don't follow feminist orthodoxy, or try to have people censored for challenging that orthodoxy, they're part of the problem.

[Jello Biafra]

Well, I'm sorry but that's dodging what Hirota is saying. It doesn't matter if feminsts invented this concept or not, and furthermore that's actually not the only reason why it's said that men can't be victimized by women.

First--feminists almost never refer to ways that women victimize others, even other women. For example even where I've read articles talking about dress code enforcement for girls that was unjustly applied, the articles rarely referred to how the women applying the code were personally unjust. The focus was on how patriarchy--men in particular--force women to dress in ways that undermine their agency. I can find several examples if you like.

Second, when feminists talk about things like sexual harassment or sexual assault they themselves don't talk about male victims or female victims of women except as a footnote. As I've said,e ven when other feminists have proposed it should be talked of more, it has not 'caught'. The preferred anrrative is about women and girls as victims of males alone.

Even when bullying by women and girls is discussed, women are not really held accountable--patriarchy is. Men are.

I think that because patriarchy is presented as ONLY being profitable for men--some men in particular--and terrible for women--never good in any way--that it is almost impossible to see anything but that women are victims and good, and men are perpetrators and bad.

Along with this is another notion that feminists rarely like to mention, that most ordinary men are considered expendable by most civilizations on earth. It is men who get sent to the hard physical labour jobs; it is men who get drafted for war. It is violence against men that is depicted as exciting or funny in movies and TV. So risks and harm to men are things we get desensitized to.

And we should not forget this: it's actually not to most men's benefit to show the same sensitivity and vulnerability that women are able to in most modern societies--when it comes to women. Feminists almost never addres women's preference for traditional behaviours from men, or the various studies surrounding this. The average man cannot help but see that women who appeal for protection get it more readily than men do; he cannot help but see that women are more attracted to men who show fewer emotional displays and are very purposeful and appear strong.

So there are complexities surrounding this issue. Feminists don't do much to challenge it. And in a way I could care less if they don't--but I do mind if they establish societal expectations that are almost impossible to fulfill and governments support them. Feminists may not have started all this, but when they tryt o shut down men's groups just because they don't follow feminist orthodoxy, or try to have people censored for challenging that orthodoxy, they're part of the problem.

My point is that it's possible to have a (standard) rape culture, where men rape women because men "want it", and at the same time have a (reverse) rape culture, where women rape men because men "want it".
And as far as who is to blame for this? I don't know. Who advances the idea that men "want it" more? Men, women, or both equally?

[New Edom]

There are similar debates going on in the UK, in France, in Australia, and in India. The problem is that the world has changed rapidly. Feminism is an ideology that has occupied for a long time, the main discussion of how this change should be managed, and the orthodoxy is being challenged now. I don't see this as a bad thing. The problem is that any challenge to that orthodoxy is often seen as woman hating even when it doesn't repudiate the idea that men and women should be equal.

Well really what I meant were things like, for example, people discuss how violence against men is utterly ignored by feminists, which is so utterly outside my experience, and reading a recent report by the EU I can see why - a majority of people in my country, according to them, believe that violence against men is "common, or very common." EDIT: I should note here that, while perhaps the problems being dealt with here are not so ignored as in the US, there are still numerous issues with how they are being dealt with here. In the example used earlier, for example, violence against women is rated to be 20% (or so) more common.
Also these ideas of feminism being run by a handful of radicals - we all see on tv just how crazy american college is, and I was recently informed by an american friend that no, whats on tv isn't a huge exaggeration. So maybe american colleges are full of crazy, radical, man-hating feminists. I find that incredibly hard to believe, but I can say for sure that that sort of thing is completely outside my own experience within the feminist movement.

I'm Canadian. In Canada there have been furious protests that shut down professors from speaking, acts of violence against journalists, accusations that are really smear campaigns, and insistence by public figures that people acquitted of rape must really be guilty. The universities and officials play into their hands because I think frankly they have a shallow grasp of what is going on or are just trying to avoid lawsuits, while ordinary people are often bewildered by all this. Almost every progressive I know is full of fear and anger.

[Alvecia]

Well, I'm sorry but that's dodging what Hirota is saying. It doesn't matter if feminsts invented this concept or not, and furthermore that's actually not the only reason why it's said that men can't be victimized by women.

First--feminists almost never refer to ways that women victimize others, even other women. For example even where I've read articles talking about dress code enforcement for girls that was unjustly applied, the articles rarely referred to how the women applying the code were personally unjust. The focus was on how patriarchy--men in particular--force women to dress in ways that undermine their agency. I can find several examples if you like.

Second, when feminists talk about things like sexual harassment or sexual assault they themselves don't talk about male victims or female victims of women except as a footnote. As I've said,e ven when other feminists have proposed it should be talked of more, it has not 'caught'. The preferred anrrative is about women and girls as victims of males alone.

Even when bullying by women and girls is discussed, women are not really held accountable--patriarchy is. Men are.

I think that because patriarchy is presented as ONLY being profitable for men--some men in particular--and terrible for women--never good in any way--that it is almost impossible to see anything but that women are victims and good, and men are perpetrators and bad.

Along with this is another notion that feminists rarely like to mention, that most ordinary men are considered expendable by most civilizations on earth. It is men who get sent to the hard physical labour jobs; it is men who get drafted for war. It is violence against men that is depicted as exciting or funny in movies and TV. So risks and harm to men are things we get desensitized to.

And we should not forget this: it's actually not to most men's benefit to show the same sensitivity and vulnerability that women are able to in most modern societies--when it comes to women. Feminists almost never addres women's preference for traditional behaviours from men, or the various studies surrounding this. The average man cannot help but see that women who appeal for protection get it more readily than men do; he cannot help but see that women are more attracted to men who show fewer emotional displays and are very purposeful and appear strong.

So there are complexities surrounding this issue. Feminists don't do much to challenge it. And in a way I could care less if they don't--but I do mind if they establish societal expectations that are almost impossible to fulfill and governments support them. Feminists may not have started all this, but when they tryt o shut down men's groups just because they don't follow feminist orthodoxy, or try to have people censored for challenging that orthodoxy, they're part of the problem.

My point is that it's possible to have a (standard) rape culture, where men rape women because men "want it", and at the same time have a (reverse) rape culture, where women rape men because men "want it".
And as far as who is to blame for this? I don't know. Who advances the idea that men "want it" more? Men, women, or both equally?

That is quite literally a contradiction in terms.

Edit: That sounds somewhat accusatory. It was amore an amused observation.

[New Edom]

Well, I'm sorry but that's dodging what Hirota is saying. It doesn't matter if feminsts invented this concept or not, and furthermore that's actually not the only reason why it's said that men can't be victimized by women.

First--feminists almost never refer to ways that women victimize others, even other women. For example even where I've read articles talking about dress code enforcement for girls that was unjustly applied, the articles rarely referred to how the women applying the code were personally unjust. The focus was on how patriarchy--men in particular--force women to dress in ways that undermine their agency. I can find several examples if you like.

Second, when feminists talk about things like sexual harassment or sexual assault they themselves don't talk about male victims or female victims of women except as a footnote. As I've said,e ven when other feminists have proposed it should be talked of more, it has not 'caught'. The preferred anrrative is about women and girls as victims of males alone.

Even when bullying by women and girls is discussed, women are not really held accountable--patriarchy is. Men are.

I think that because patriarchy is presented as ONLY being profitable for men--some men in particular--and terrible for women--never good in any way--that it is almost impossible to see anything but that women are victims and good, and men are perpetrators and bad.

Along with this is another notion that feminists rarely like to mention, that most ordinary men are considered expendable by most civilizations on earth. It is men who get sent to the hard physical labour jobs; it is men who get drafted for war. It is violence against men that is depicted as exciting or funny in movies and TV. So risks and harm to men are things we get desensitized to.

And we should not forget this: it's actually not to most men's benefit to show the same sensitivity and vulnerability that women are able to in most modern societies--when it comes to women. Feminists almost never addres women's preference for traditional behaviours from men, or the various studies surrounding this. The average man cannot help but see that women who appeal for protection get it more readily than men do; he cannot help but see that women are more attracted to men who show fewer emotional displays and are very purposeful and appear strong.

So there are complexities surrounding this issue. Feminists don't do much to challenge it. And in a way I could care less if they don't--but I do mind if they establish societal expectations that are almost impossible to fulfill and governments support them. Feminists may not have started all this, but when they tryt o shut down men's groups just because they don't follow feminist orthodoxy, or try to have people censored for challenging that orthodoxy, they're part of the problem.

My point is that it's possible to have a (standard) rape culture, where men rape women because men "want it", and at the same time have a (reverse) rape culture, where women rape men because men "want it".
And as far as who is to blame for this? I don't know. Who advances the idea that men "want it" more? Men, women, or both equally?

I've seen both do it personally, and it's presented frequently in popular media written by both men and women, by feminists and non feminsts alike.

However you also were suggesting that 'men want it' is a principle reason why male viticms are not taken more seriously, and I think that's one of several factors which I listed above.

[Galloism]

Well, I'm sorry but that's dodging what Hirota is saying. It doesn't matter if feminsts invented this concept or not, and furthermore that's actually not the only reason why it's said that men can't be victimized by women.

First--feminists almost never refer to ways that women victimize others, even other women. For example even where I've read articles talking about dress code enforcement for girls that was unjustly applied, the articles rarely referred to how the women applying the code were personally unjust. The focus was on how patriarchy--men in particular--force women to dress in ways that undermine their agency. I can find several examples if you like.

Second, when feminists talk about things like sexual harassment or sexual assault they themselves don't talk about male victims or female victims of women except as a footnote. As I've said,e ven when other feminists have proposed it should be talked of more, it has not 'caught'. The preferred anrrative is about women and girls as victims of males alone.

Even when bullying by women and girls is discussed, women are not really held accountable--patriarchy is. Men are.

I think that because patriarchy is presented as ONLY being profitable for men--some men in particular--and terrible for women--never good in any way--that it is almost impossible to see anything but that women are victims and good, and men are perpetrators and bad.

Along with this is another notion that feminists rarely like to mention, that most ordinary men are considered expendable by most civilizations on earth. It is men who get sent to the hard physical labour jobs; it is men who get drafted for war. It is violence against men that is depicted as exciting or funny in movies and TV. So risks and harm to men are things we get desensitized to.

And we should not forget this: it's actually not to most men's benefit to show the same sensitivity and vulnerability that women are able to in most modern societies--when it comes to women. Feminists almost never addres women's preference for traditional behaviours from men, or the various studies surrounding this. The average man cannot help but see that women who appeal for protection get it more readily than men do; he cannot help but see that women are more attracted to men who show fewer emotional displays and are very purposeful and appear strong.

So there are complexities surrounding this issue. Feminists don't do much to challenge it. And in a way I could care less if they don't--but I do mind if they establish societal expectations that are almost impossible to fulfill and governments support them. Feminists may not have started all this, but when they tryt o shut down men's groups just because they don't follow feminist orthodoxy, or try to have people censored for challenging that orthodoxy, they're part of the problem.

My point is that it's possible to have a (standard) rape culture, where men rape women because men "want it", and at the same time have a (reverse) rape culture, where women rape men because men "want it".
And as far as who is to blame for this? I don't know. Who advances the idea that men "want it" more? Men, women, or both equally?

Probably both - which is more is questionable.

In my service where I try to counsel men who have been raped, those who have decided to approach their rapist on the subject (which frequently happens when she is a wife or girlfriend) is near universally met with incredulity.

Like he's trying to explain how he was kidnapped by aliens.

But, then again, that's the reaction often received from friends or family as well, of both genders. So it's a very serious problem cutting across both genders.