Is heterosexual hook up culture fuelling rapes on campuses?

[Crurnlark]

You're obsolete, you've to prove you could be useful

Sorry, I really can't focus on any portion of this argument except this.

1. Where does this mentality put infertile women?
... that's pretty much it.

[Chessmistress]

You're obsolete, you've to prove you could be useful

Sorry, I really can't focus on any portion of this argument except this.

1. Where does this mentality put infertile women?
... that's pretty much it.

It isn't about infertile women or infertile men, it's about fertile persons, just a personal consideration based on an essay of a famous anthropologist.

And I have to admit I've exaggerated, I was a little angered yesterday, personal reasons, and that was combined with seeing male entitlement here...so it turned out in a form harsher than I wished to put it out.

[FelrikTheDeleted]

Sorry, I really can't focus on any portion of this argument except this.

1. Where does this mentality put infertile women?
... that's pretty much it.

It isn't about infertile women or infertile men, it's about fertile persons, just a personal consideration based on an essay of a famous anthropologist.

And I have to admit I've exaggerated, I was a little angered yesterday, personal reasons, and that was combined with seeing male entitlement here...so it turned out in a form harsher than I wished to put it out.

Because males giving their opinion is male entitlement.

[Longweather]

No, instead of shouting as loud as them, and risking looking (and being) as stupid as them, you have to ensure that you are smarter than them. Provide evidence for why they are wrong and you are right. That might not always be easy, but that's precisely why this vocal group of feminists have to rely on snarl words - slacktivists can't do evidence.

Have you tried persuading people that are more swayed by emotion than rationality? You have to use emotion/persuasion to somehow counter them because using facts and logic is like playing 2D chess while using emotions is the 3D chess of persuasion. It's a losing battle that I've been through several times. It doesn't help that a lot of people don't want debate or to hear other sides of the argument, they tend to want echo chambers.

I believe I read somewhere that men are more likely to dole out one way abuse than women but women and men are more likely to be mutually abusive than not.

Since domestic abuse was being raised:

http://www.prweb.com/releases/2013/5/prweb10741752.htm

The most comprehensive review of the scholarly domestic violence research literature ever conducted concludes, among other things, that women perpetrate physical and emotional abuse, as well as engage in control behaviors, at comparable rates to men. The Partner Abuse State of Knowledge project, or PASK, whose final installment was just published in the journal Partner Abuse, is an unparalleled three-year research project, conducted by 42 scholars at 20 universities and research centers, and including information on 17 areas of domestic violence research.

http://www.domesticviolenceresearch.org ... imization/

Overall, results indicated that physical IPV victimization is prominent among men and women in heterosexual relationships. Across all studies included in this review, approximately one in four women (23.1%) and one in five men (19.3%) experienced physical violence in an intimate relationship, with an overall pooled prevalence estimate of 22.4%.

And significantly less scientific http://jezebel.com/294383/have-you-ever ... uh-we-have

Of course, this flies in the face of established feminist (and government) dogma. Take a look at the Duluth Model, which was (and as far as I know, still is) the most widely used model for tackling domestic violence. It is based in feminist theory positing that "domestic violence is the result of patriarchal ideology in which men are encouraged and expected to control their partners." A core premise is the idea that men are always the perpetrator and women the victim. When the law is stacked against you it is inevitable that men are going to be less inclined to report an attack when chances are they are going to be treated as the perpetrator. Suddenly the one in five figure for men looks likely to be a low end estimate.

There is also some evidence that women are more likely to be the aggressor in domestic violence in non-reciprocated violence:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1854883/

Almost 24% of all relationships had some violence, and half (49.7%) of those were reciprocally violent. In nonreciprocally violent relationships, women were the perpetrators in more than 70% of the cases.

EDIT: Not that we should be using such statistics to decide relevant public policy of course.

Indeed, we shouldn't. Nor should we allow feminist theory to dictate public policy either. A non-gendered approach free from the peddled bullshit of "patriarchy." Is the most rational approach.

Ouch, this brought back flashbacks of my abusive ex-girlfriend. I'll preface this by saying that I am a black belt in Kajukenbo and have received fairly painful beatings/injuries sparring with little controls to get used to how things are in reality. My ex-girlfriend was several inches shorter than me and would go out to San Francisco (not the best areas at times either) with friends to go to ballroom/swing/jazz dance clubs. I even joined them several times. When my mother, also a martial artist, found out she decided to teach my ex how to punch, throw hooks, and elbow to hurt an attacker just in case.

Now, as my ex was energetic and a dancer, I had seen the way she treated learning self-defense (like a toy). It's why I didn't teach her myself. Within days she started using what my mother taught her, mind you that this stuff is general taught while emphasizing to use it to protect yourself, to hit me whenever she was annoyed at me or exasperated. Hit me in the ribs... the floating ribs at times. Sometimes leaving bruises. She would do this in private or public. Nobody stopped her. Nobody said anything. Well, nobody said anything except my mother when she had dinner with us. After voicing her concern while my girlfriend was in the restroom, I finally stood up to her and began stopping it (hitting me had become a habit and so it took several weeks of stopping her attacks before she got the hint).

One might say that I should have stopped it earlier. I could have. However, things like how general American society socializes men to not hit women and that we "might deserve it" held me back. Despite dozens of people seeing my girlfriend beat me in public, it took one person to tell me I didn't deserve it.

All of this is a tangent on the topic and OP, I apologize. That Jezebel article just... brought out an unexpected outpouring of emotions from me. I have never read anything else on the site but is those approved comments (many comments on the article condemning domestic abuse are pending for years) and the general tone lead me to thing that the site is trash. Utter trash.

As an extra aside, Chessmistress, I don't think men are all that privileged or entitled in, at least, general American culture. Men are often left to fend for themselves and actually victim blamed when they receive abuse. I've seen several videos showing how people in public situations show that it's the case. I don't know why it seems that there's so much sexual assault or rape (statistics from the US Bureau of Justice show it's on the slow decline) but I do know that the US has an issue that each state has different definitions and punishments for such crimes.

[The Orson Empire]

What, is it because he was a bit too young to meet your strict standards?

*yawn*
You keep being entitled.
It's quite funny, but even boring.
I think you'll learn it the hard way.
However, for those who are able to read French, here there's an interesting paper by a very famous anthropologist:
http://graduateinstitute.ch/files/live/ ... eillas.pdf
Such paper was presented on March, 15, 2000 in France, at the convention of the organization for Women's Development (one of the most important Women's organizations in France, actually fighting against FGM and surrogacy).
It explains that is absoutely true that 90% males are not needed in practically all mammals, including humans.
But it explains, and that's much more important, that the right path to follow isn't a reduction of the percentage of men, but through education: men should understand that they have to be useful and not harmful to the society, because the majority of women doesn't wish such reduction and we just only wish being treated as human beings.
It also explains a possible (and very likely) reason for patriarchy: according such anthropologist, the men, realizing the fact that most them are biologically useless for the perpetuation of the species in a natural setting, have flipped the things in their favor, through patriarchy that was meant for controlling the women.
Such anthropologist isn't an anonymous blogger, he was a very famous and respected French anthropologist
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claude_Meillassoux

Sometimes I think expalining things it's a waste of time, really.

You're obsolete, you've to prove you could be useful

This...this is not "feminism". This is misandry. Hell, this is bigotry!

[Costa Fierro]

It isn't about infertile women or infertile men, it's about fertile persons, just a personal consideration based on an essay of a famous anthropologist.

And I have to admit I've exaggerated, I was a little angered yesterday, personal reasons, and that was combined with seeing male entitlement here...so it turned out in a form harsher than I wished to put it out.

Because males giving their opinion is male entitlement.

Because how dare we have opinions on something that affects us indirectly or directly.

[Hirota]

Have you tried persuading people that are more swayed by emotion than rationality? You have to use emotion/persuasion to somehow counter them because using facts and logic is like playing 2D chess while using emotions is the 3D chess of persuasion. It's a losing battle that I've been through several times. It doesn't help that a lot of people don't want debate or to hear other sides of the argument, they tend to want echo chambers.

Hi Longweather. Oh I agree with a lot of what you said, but I find that there is no point persuading that kind of person. No, I'm not going to lower my standards to try and sway a lost cause. I'm far more interested in the 3rd person who isn't as entrenched in their irrationality. Expose how stupid the 2nd person is, get the recognition and agreement of the 3rd person.

All of this is a tangent on the topic and OP, I apologize. One might say that I should have stopped it earlier. I could have. However, things like how general American society socializes men to not hit women and that we "might deserve it" held me back. Despite dozens of people seeing my girlfriend beat me in public, it took one person to tell me I didn't deserve it.

No need to apologise, we've had a number of other regular male posters talk about their experiences of being the victims of violence from their female partners and we've seen quite a lot of awareness from the wider general NS community that domestic violence isn't the one-way direction that it's made out to be in government policy and media.

That Jezebel article just...Utter trash.

Thats Gawker for you in particular, and feminist blog shite in general!

[Hirota]

And I have to admit I've exaggerated, I was a little angered yesterday, personal reasons, and that was combined with seeing male entitlement here...so it turned out in a form harsher than I wished to put it out.

That you think you can be forgiven for being an obnoxious so-and-so because of reasons that are nothing to do with anyone here demonstrate your sense of entitlement.

[Settrah]

Chess, what exactly do you mean when you say 'male entitlement' anyway? Like, specifically, exactly, what is that? What are people here doing that means that?

Because for men to be able to openly speak on a message board, about how they feel about certain contemporary critiques of modern society, being the same as being male entitled kind of points to the idea that you don't want men to have freedom of speech because they don't deserve it anymore? And the only credible form of discourse is that of a woman's?

Am I reading that wrong? Just trying to understand what you mean, when you say that.

[Frenline Delpha]

Chess, what exactly do you mean when you say 'male entitlement' anyway? Like, specifically, exactly, what is that? What are people here doing that means that?

Because for men to be able to openly speak on a message board, about how they feel about certain contemporary critiques of modern society, being the same as being male entitled kind of points to the idea that you don't want men to have freedom of speech because they don't deserve it anymore? And the only credible form of discourse is that of a woman's?

Am I reading that wrong? Just trying to understand what you mean, when you say that.

I wouldn't be surprised.

[Grinning Dragon]

Because males giving their opinion is male entitlement.

Because how dare we have opinions on something that affects us indirectly or directly.

Pfft. Didn't you guys get the memo? We men cannot interrupt or interject, express or refute when there is a "I am woman, hear me roar" moment going on. Continued interruptions, only leads to being called some made up word that like 4 people in world use "mansplainin'"

[Settrah]

Chess, what exactly do you mean when you say 'male entitlement' anyway? Like, specifically, exactly, what is that? What are people here doing that means that?

Because for men to be able to openly speak on a message board, about how they feel about certain contemporary critiques of modern society, being the same as being male entitled kind of points to the idea that you don't want men to have freedom of speech because they don't deserve it anymore? And the only credible form of discourse is that of a woman's?

Am I reading that wrong? Just trying to understand what you mean, when you say that.

I wouldn't be surprised.

And yet radfems still wonder why they gain hostility, and where people get the notion of misandry and gynosupremacy from, after they say things like that.

[NotAnotherFeministPuppet]

Chess, what exactly do you mean when you say 'male entitlement' anyway? Like, specifically, exactly, what is that? What are people here doing that means that?

As you should know if you've completed your compulsory gender studies course, It's another name for Mansplaining. Mansplaining is not a joke. It is the single greatest threat facing women today. Mansplaining can kill...and has. Its body count is second only to manspreading.

[Gristol-Serkonos]

Y'know, I might take these issues seriously unless such sources come from the US Department of Justice or any foreign counterparts.

[Imperializt Russia]

Because how dare we have opinions on something that affects us indirectly or directly.

Pfft. Didn't you guys get the memo? We men cannot interrupt or interject, express or refute when there is a "I am woman, hear me roar" moment going on. Continued interruptions, only leads to being called some made up word that like 4 people in world use "mansplainin'"

"Made up"
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyl ... astronauts

[Community Values]

You're obsolete, you've to prove you could be useful

In this context, 99.9% of the human race is useless. We only need 100 people to mate, reproduce, and keep the human race living on.

Thank God we have elevated to a point where we don't see breeding as the epitome of usefulness. At least, that's what I thought.

[Frenline Delpha]

Pfft. Didn't you guys get the memo? We men cannot interrupt or interject, express or refute when there is a "I am woman, hear me roar" moment going on. Continued interruptions, only leads to being called some made up word that like 4 people in world use "mansplainin'"

"Made up"
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyl ... astronauts

Guardian. Yeah, nice try.

[Community Values]

Pfft. Didn't you guys get the memo? We men cannot interrupt or interject, express or refute when there is a "I am woman, hear me roar" moment going on. Continued interruptions, only leads to being called some made up word that like 4 people in world use "mansplainin'"

"Made up"
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyl ... astronauts

Is this something that predominantly happens to women? I feel like splitting hairs isn't limited to men.

[Imperializt Russia]

"Made up"
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyl ... astronauts

Guardian. Yeah, nice try.

Fucking lol.

It mentions Trump, are you interested now?

[FelrikTheDeleted]

Why don't we call mansplaining what it really is, condescending explanation, rather then connect a gender to the word, unless everyone is willing to make womplaining.

[Community Values]

Why don't we call mansplaining what it really is, condescending explanation, rather then connect a gender to the word, unless everyone is willing to make womplaining.

Yeah, a lot of this.

[Imperializt Russia]

"Made up"
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyl ... astronauts

Is this something that predominantly happens to women? I feel like splitting hairs isn't limited to men.

It happens to women a hell of a lot, especially in instances where the woman is more or equally qualified to the men.
Here's the Trump instance. People can bitch about it being a Salon article in their own time.
http://www.salon.com/2016/09/08/veteran ... -veterans/

[Imperializt Russia]

Why don't we call mansplaining what it really is, condescending explanation, rather then connect a gender to the word, unless everyone is willing to make womplaining.

Would you like to find me some instances of "womansplaining"?

Mainsplaining exists because (some) men feel, on some level, for whatever reason, women are just incapable of properly articulating themselves, or are slightly inaccurate (almost always while still being perfectly correct) and must be corrected. Yet leeway is often offered to men in the same position.

[Hirota]

Why don't we call mansplaining what it really is, condescending explanation, rather then connect a gender to the word, unless everyone is willing to make womplaining.

I quite like the idea of mansplaining to them that mansplaining is a redundant word since patronising is already a gendered term, since it derives from the latin word for father, but as we know, latin is a tool of teh evils patriarchy and thus should not be trusted.

[Community Values]

Is this something that predominantly happens to women? I feel like splitting hairs isn't limited to men.

It happens to women a hell of a lot, especially in instances where the woman is more or equally qualified to the men.
Here's the Trump instance. People can bitch about it being a Salon article in their own time.
http://www.salon.com/2016/09/08/veteran ... -veterans/

I wouldn't know this for sure, but I'm pretty sure douches will do anything to try and make a person look stupid. I would suspect it isn't something that goes from unemployed men to professional women, rather than any gender, at any class. This is just conjecture though.