Why are we hating all the men?

Ulysses Gaze

Wibbs wrote: »

How dare you come here with your "heteronormative" metaphors! You patriarchist you!

You're all too Cisgendered for me so....

Wibbs

anna080 wrote: »

I wouldn't want to be attached to that myth, would you?

Being the perpetual victim with no agency, but who wants all the rights of being an adult without the responsibilities of same is a very comfortable position to take. If you can get away with it. Life seems so much easier when it's always somebody else's fault. Imagine being treated like a spoiled child, pampered to and respected just because you've not reached adulthood. Great, if you have zero self respect.

And again with the irony bypass, given that's the thankfully out of date misogynist's view of women as agentless quasi adults not sure about what they want, but in need of external/men's protection.

And that's why I despise modern "feminism" and regard their vocal proponents as half egos tilting at windmills, because the women I know and have known are anything but agentless hysterical spoiled children looking to the external for blame. Quite the opposite in fact.

Wibbs

cloudatlas wrote: »

yes adjust the meaning of your point now, no such nuance before but now there are exceptions to the rule when needed.

Good god. #facepalm. I am truly flabbergasted by the lack of self awareness contained in that statement.

RabbleRouser2k

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

More and more young women are also seeking to study more (PHD's, doctorates etc), as in I could argue that because they don't envision themselves getting married, or if they do, they don't envision marriage right now. Many are studying up until their late 20s, early 30s.

You do get quite a few doctors who do admonish women who thought they could have it all at 40-but that's just facts, it's not misogny. It's just cold, cruel biology. Fertility drops in women after 35/36, that men can go and have kids well into old age, and beyond is just biology-its rooted in evolution.

Personally, I never envisioned marriage for me-as a male. Nor did I envision kids or anything like that.

That kind of comes back to a post I made earlier. Someone asked "what do men want to improve things?". I mentioned a couple of things, honesty being the main one, and it's just left. Because that's why "men" don't organise as a group. There's a bit of realism. No man expects to "have it all" in the classic victim feminist way. It's up to people to make up their minds what they want from life and realise that not everyone can have what they want.
Simple example; I'm early in my career. I could move for a good bit more money already. However I really like where I am, the people, how much I'm learning, not having to work weekends, all that stuff. I have no desire to ever work 50 hour weeks on a regular basis. That may limit my career and hell, it may make sense in the future for me to be a stay-at-home-parent. It's a decision that if it ever has to be made will be made between two grown-ups.

RabbleRouser2k

The Fake Sheikh wrote: »

Anyone see that advert where the woman points to a child's drawing of a muscular man on the fridge labelled "mammy's gym friend" and says something along the lines of "I'll just show him this" if her husband doesn't agree or do something.

Can't remember exactly how it went but it's bizarre. Basically threatening to f*ck a big muscly man if the husband doesn't behave himself.

Oh yeah-she's implying it, as in trying to convince husband that she's interested than someone else.

I imagine if the roles were reversed, the advert would be getting all sorts of complaints.

cloudatlas

mzungu wrote: »

Are consent classes the answer? We don't have anti-murder/anti-robbery/anti-violence/anti-fraud classes, why is their the belief that consent classes will stop rapists?

I think we should have proper sex education classes (for both) in primary and secondary school. That would be a positive step forward.

But, I doubt rapists would be paying much attention, or even attending, consent classes.

Consent is not currently a core aspect of mainstream sex and relationship education so perhaps they are compensating at too late a stage.

Widdershins

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

Oh yeah-she's implying it, as in trying to convince husband that she's interested than someone else.

I imagine if the roles were reversed, the advert would be getting all sorts of complaints.

Psychological abuse. Imo.

drugstore cowboy

cloudatlas wrote: »

Consent classes are a good idea no matter. One in 12 female students are victims of rape or attempted rape http://www.thejournal.ie/irish-students-sexual-assault-survey-2580175-Feb2016/

What would a consent class consist of? I know it sounds like a stupid question but I would enjoy hearing what will be taught in these classes. Would it be one class or a course lasting a few weeks? etc

cloudatlas

drugstore cowboy wrote: »

What would a consent class consist of? I know it sounds like a stupid question but I would enjoy hearing what will be taught in these classes. Would it be one class or a course lasting a few weeks? etc

Here is one example: http://www.nusconnect.org.uk/resources/i-heart-consent-facilitator-training-guide

These kind of classes are in their infancy, they only started in the last 4 or 5 years.

bodice ripper

cloudatlas wrote:

Consent is not currently a core aspect of mainstream sex and relationship education so perhaps they are compensating at too late a stage.

You know what won't help? HR jargon.

cloudatlas

bodice ripper wrote: »

You know what won't help? HR jargon.

What's that got to do with H.R. I was actually agreeing with mzungu, sex education needs to be improved in schools and IMO consent should be introduced to teenagers at that stage as the uptake of the classes at universities seems to be low anyway. They are trying new tacks, why not try out different campaigns and see if they are effective.

One eyed Jack

cloudatlas wrote: »

Consent is not currently a core aspect of mainstream sex and relationship education so perhaps they are compensating at too late a stage.

Children are taught from an early age to respect themselves and others, consent is of course a core aspect of mainstream relationships and sexuality education.

What the people who run these classes want to teach children is that they live in a 'rape culture', and that sort of mindless fearmongering is simply a waste of time as it does nothing to change anyones attitude as individuals. It would be like trying to teach someone that's bought hook, line and sinker into rape culture, that we actually don't live in a culture where people should constantly live in fear for their safety. That sort of paranoia isn't healthy for anyone, of any age, in college, outside college, in or out of school.

That's not to mention the lack of interest among college students in these classes in the first place -

Sexual consent classes at UCD cancelled due to lack of interest

cloudatlas

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Children are taught from an early age to respect themselves and others, consent is of course a core aspect of mainstream relationships and sexuality education.

What the people who run these classes want to teach children is that they live in a 'rape culture', and that sort of mindless fearmongering is simply a waste of time as it does nothing to change anyones attitude as individuals. It would be like trying to teach someone that's bought hook, line and sinker into rape culture, that we actually don't live in a culture where people should constantly live in fear for their safety. That sort of paranoia isn't healthy for anyone, of any age, in college, outside college, in or out of school.

That's not to mention the lack of interest among college students in these classes in the first place -

Sexual consent classes at UCD cancelled due to lack of interest

Sexual consent classes at UCD cancelled due to lack of interest. Yeah I read that, I'm glad they're trying out new things, until recent years they didn't hand out free alarms either, or start campaigns that encourage all victims of sexual assault to approach university authorities. Why not try out different approaches and see what is most effective? They aren't children they are adults, it's for students. Yeah children are taught that at a young age, I had to tell my 4 year old niece the other day to come and tell me directly if anyone asks her to do anything that makes her feel uncomfortable as an 8 year old boy asked her to take her dress off. Yeah so don't worry conversations are ongoing and everywhere.

NinjaKirby

mzungu wrote: »

Are consent classes the answer? We don't have anti-murder/anti-robbery/anti-violence/anti-fraud classes, why is their the belief that consent classes will stop rapists?

I'll make an attempt at this.

In a perfect society there would be no crime. No prisons. No poor people. Nobody with untreated or hidden mental illness. No borders. Everyone would be free to just be whoever they want to be, whenever they want to be.

If we are talking about Intersectional Feminism then the goal is basically a Utopian culture. Unfortunately the biggest barrier to this is Human Nature.

So if you ask American Intersectional Feminists what the punishment should be for committing a crime such as rape, whilst reminding them that they want to abolish the prison system, then they have a bit of a contradiction that they have to face up to.

The only solution is to erase the instinct in the human mind to commit crimes.

Of course, not all humans are going to commit horrible crimes so how can we tell the good humans from the bad ones? Well, we can't so we just need to condition all of them.

Consent Classes are the misguided notion that we can somehow brainwash bad or messed up people into never even thinking in their head that they should either push the moral boundaries in sexual interactions or just commit outright rape against another human.

There is also the idea that we can somehow reach an authoritarian hand into people's private interactions and stop them from telling certain jokes or making certain comments.

Again, because we cannot ban speech within private conversations we need to somehow condition the mind to not even be able to think about saying certain things.

If we could just somehow completely control the minds, and actions, of others then we'd finally have our perfect world.

One eyed Jack

cloudatlas wrote: »

Sexual consent classes at UCD cancelled due to lack of interest. Yeah I read that, I'm glad they're trying out new things, until recent years they didn't hand out free alarms either, or start campaigns that encourage all victims of sexual assault to approach university authorities. Why not try out different approaches and see what is most effective? They aren't children they are adults, it's for students. Yeah children are taught that at a young age, I had to tell my 4 year old niece the other day to come and tell me directly if anyone asks her to do anything that makes her feel uncomfortable as an 8 year old boy asked her to take her dress off. Yeah so don't worry conversations are ongoing and everywhere.

I'm not worried though, at all, because for one I know we don't live in a rape culture. Secondly it's because I know well that conversations are ongoing and everywhere that I know relationships and sexuality education in a formal setting such as a classroom or lecture hall is just going to be an hour long pisstake for anyone who is forced to sit there for it (the irony of being forced to take consent classes isn't lost on anyone btw).

But your example did remind me of a couple of the people I took a course on child safety with. I did wonder why out of all of them, not one of them suggested that they would encourage the child to talk to their parents!

The whole idea of the overall program was supporting children, but IMO there was far too much focus on the possibility that children could be abused, and if you're attuned to that mindset, you'll start looking for things that aren't there, and you'll lose sight of the idea of supporting children in every aspect of their lives as a whole, because you'll be so focussed on convincing them that they should be constantly living in a state of fear and mistrust. There's more to life than living in constant fear and inflicting unnecessary anxiety on children.

NinjaKirby

cloudatlas wrote: »

Sexual consent classes at UCD cancelled due to lack of interest. Yeah I read that, I'm glad they're trying out new things, until recent years they didn't hand out free alarms either, or start campaigns that encourage all victims of sexual assault to approach university authorities. Why not try out different approaches and see what is most effective? They aren't children they are adults, it's for students. Yeah children are taught that at a young age, I had to tell my 4 year old niece the other day to come and tell me directly if anyone asks her to do anything that makes her feel uncomfortable as an 8 year old boy asked her to take her dress off. Yeah so don't worry conversations are ongoing and everywhere.

Nobody is denying that these classes have good intentions.

I think if there was an ethical way to stop sexual assault from ever happening then we should probably do it. Yes.

I have heard though that the road to hell is paved with good intentions so maybe we'd want to be careful?

silverharp

NinjaKirby wrote: »

I'll make an attempt at this.

In a perfect society there would be no crime. No prisons. No poor people. Nobody with untreated or hidden mental illness. No borders. Everyone would be free to just be whoever they want to be, whenever they want to be.

If we are talking about Intersectional Feminism then the goal is basically a Utopian culture. Unfortunately the biggest barrier to this is Human Nature.

So if you ask American Intersectional Feminists what the punishment should be for committing a crime such as rape, whilst reminding them that they want to abolish the prison system, then they have a bit of a contradiction that they have to face up to.

The only solution is to erase the instinct in the human mind to commit crimes.

Of course, not all humans are going to commit horrible crimes so how can we tell the good humans from the bad ones? Well, we can't so we just need to condition all of them.

Consent Classes are the misguided notion that we can somehow brainwash bad or messed up people into never even thinking in their head that they should either push the moral boundaries in sexual interactions or just commit outright rape against another human.

There is also the idea that we can somehow reach an authoritarian hand into people's private interactions and stop them from telling certain jokes or making certain comments.

Again, because we cannot ban speech within private conversations we need to somehow condition the mind to not even be able to think about saying certain things.

If we could just somehow completely control the minds, and actions, of others then we'd finally have our perfect world.

its just new age Marxism , people are blank slates yada yada coupled with what could be described as "toxic femininity" ie an out of control nurturing instinct which might have some usefulness if talking about a 6mth old infant but dangerous and inappropriate if applied to older kids and adults. Its why more and more people think feminists are just daft.

cloudatlas

One eyed Jack wrote: »

But your example did remind me of a couple of the people I took a course on child safety with. I did wonder why out of all of them, not one of them suggested that they would encourage the child to talk to their parents!
.

Sorry, her parents were there also we were saying that she could approach any of us. (!)

cloudatlas

NinjaKirby wrote: »

Nobody is denying that these classes have good intentions.

I think if there was an ethical way to stop sexual assault from ever happening then we should probably do it. Yes.

I have heard though that the road to hell is paved with good intentions so maybe we'd want to be careful?

So try nothing? What do you suggest?

Will I Am Not

Men leer at women. Women leer at men.
A lot of men talk about the filthy things they would like to do to women. A lot of women talk about the filthy things they would like to do to men.

If it's men it's rapey. If it's women it's expressing themselves.

mzungu

cloudatlas wrote: »

Consent is not currently a core aspect of mainstream sex and relationship education so perhaps they are compensating at too late a stage.

I do think they leave too late. As part of a sex-ed workshop they should explore things like sexual contact, and make people aware of their personal space etc. That would be a positive step. Within that, they should of course explore inappropriate behaviour, thus empowering young adults to be aware of their boundaries, and those of others.

However, the idea of consent classes is a lot different. It makes the assumption that social engineering can be a silver bullet for rape. Hence, it is an ideology, and not a preventative measure that is backed up by evidence.

One eyed Jack

cloudatlas wrote: »

So try nothing? What do you suggest?

It would be a good idea IMO to put evidence before ideology -

In the last few years, there has been an unfortunate trend towards blaming “rape culture” for the extensive problem of sexual violence on campuses. While it is helpful to point out the systemic barriers to addressing the problem, it is important to not lose sight of a simple fact: Rape is caused not by cultural factors but by the conscious decisions, of a small percentage of the community, to commit a violent crime.

While that may seem an obvious point, it has tended to get lost in recent debates. This has led to an inclination to focus on particular segments of the student population (e.g., athletes), particular aspects of campus culture (e.g., the Greek system), or traits that are common in many millions of law-abiding Americans (e.g., “masculinity”), rather than on the subpopulation at fault: those who choose to commit rape. This trend has the paradoxical effect of making it harder to stop sexual violence, since it removes the focus from the individual at fault, and seemingly mitigates personal responsibility for his or her own actions.

By the time they reach college, most students have been exposed to 18 years of prevention messages, in one form or another. Thanks to repeated messages from parents, religious leaders, teachers, coaches, the media and, yes, the culture at large, the overwhelming majority of these young adults have learned right from wrong, and enter college knowing that rape falls squarely in the latter category.

Research supports the view that to focus solely on certain social groups or “types” of students in the effort to end campus sexual violence is a mistake. Dr. David Lisak estimates that three percent of college men are responsible for more than 90% of rapes.iii Other studies suggest that between 3-7% of college men have committed an act of sexual violence or would consider doing so. It is this relatively small percentage of the population, which has proven itself immune to years of prevention messages, that we must address in other ways. (Unfortunately, we are not aware of reliable research on female college perpetrators.)

Source: RAINN

NinjaKirby

cloudatlas wrote: »

So try nothing? What do you suggest?

In any case, I feel like the consent classes are just there so the educational establishments can cover their own ass. Much like the "caution, contents may be hot" label on a McDonalds coffee cup. So when a rape takes place on campus they can say "well we've sent them all to consent classes so it's nothing to do with us".

Regarding the idea that I just want to "try nothing", this was actually something I was going to address in my previous post.

A pessimist like myself might just say "F it, there's nothing I can do" and I might just decide to be a good person myself and try to hold others I associate with to some moral standard. Let the authorities sort out the criminals.

However, the person aiming to engineer the perfect society will say to me "as long as there is injustice we can't ever stop fighting".

Here's the thing cloudatlas, sometimes when you fight for good you end up causing damage to good people. People who did nothing wrong get caught up in the battle against their will. Maybe you need to send a few innocent men to jail or spread a bit of anxiety and mass hysteria around to get your results. I don't know.

I am not saying "do nothing". I am asking what if your solution does more harm than good?

Whether it be holding "consent classes" or having a "listen and believe" policy are you saying there are no downsides to those approaches? No potential for total disaster? What is the price we should be willing to pay here?

Does the Consent Class have a measurable result? Can the existence of, and participation in, these classes be shown to reduce the incidences of sexual assault in society (I believe the numbers have been falling for many years anyway)? Or do the classes just exist for us to say "at least we are doing something".

What is the difference between spending time, energy, and money doing something that doesn't work and doing nothing at all?

cloudatlas

NinjaKirby wrote: »

In any case, I feel like the consent classes are just there so the educational establishments can cover their own ass. Much like the "caution, contents may be hot" label on a McDonalds coffee cup. So when a rape takes place on campus they can say "well we've sent them all to consent classes so it's nothing to do with us".

Regarding the idea that I just want to "try nothing", this was actually something I was going to address in my previous post.

A pessimist like myself might just say "F it, there's nothing I can do" and I might just decide to be a good person myself and try to hold others I associate with to some moral standard. Let the authorities sort out the criminals.

However, the person aiming to engineer the perfect society will say to me "as long as there is injustice we can't ever stop fighting".

Here's the thing cloudatlas, sometimes when you fight for good you end up causing damage to good people. People who did nothing wrong get caught up in the battle against their will. Maybe you need to send a few innocent men to jail or spread a bit of anxiety and mass hysteria around to get your results. I don't know.

I am not saying "do nothing". I am asking what if your solution does more harm than good?

Whether it be holding "consent classes" or having a "listen and believe" policy are you saying there are no downsides to those approaches? No potential for total disaster?

What is the price we should be willing to pay here?

There are more mental health awareness campaigns than ever before now also so the University has to deal with that, every year or every other year students take their own lives, fees increase, there are other pressures that exacerbate underlying issues. Perhaps Universities are becoming more aware that they are a community not just a commercial center and they have a duty of care to put money into these campaigns. You could be cynical there also and say that they are only encouraging those campaigns because the media has reported on recent suicides. The trialing of these courses could lead to the programs being extended to schools depending on what the findings are. Personal development in schools is more geared towards discussing personal well being and mental health.

Also aren't the classes about communication also for women to understand that it's okay to say no at any time but of course I will be told that I am naive about this although you hear stories about women feeling pressurised into continuing and not feeling confident to back down and freezing etc., Not confident that the goal is to deamonise sounds like the goal is to be empowering for both sexes but there ya go.

bodice ripper

Your post was couched in HR jargon. Probably to make it sound more weighty. Which everyone finds off putting.

cloudatlas

bodice ripper wrote: »

Your post was couched in HR jargon. Probably to make it sound more weighty. Which everyone finds off putting.

I could probably just state it in plainer English if you're struggling but it sounds like you have beef with your own h.r. department which I can't help you with.

One eyed Jack

cloudatlas wrote: »

There are more mental health awareness campaigns than ever before now also so the University has to deal with that, every year or every other year students take their own lives, fees increase, there are other pressures that exacerbate underlying issues. Perhaps Universities are becoming more aware that they are a community not just a commercial center and they have a duty of care to put money into these campaigns. You could be cynical there also and say that they are only encouraging those campaigns because the media has reported on recent suicides. The trialing of these courses could lead to the programs being extended to schools depending on what the findings are.

Universities are aware of how litigious society is encouraged to be, so they try to keep this stuff in-house, which is why you're encouraged to report assaults to them where they can have their own kangaroo courts a la the US, as opposed to reporting it to the proper authorities that are the Gardaí and giving them every support to carry out a proper investigation. Universities are worried about their reputation, not yours.

Personal development in schools is more geared towards discussing personal well being and mental health.

Yes, it's part of a broader, whole education, rather than spending hours dissecting the minutae of what to do when presented with situation X, and leaving them ill prepared for situation Y because nobody thought to bring it up in 'consent class'.

Also aren't the classes about communication also for women to understand that it's okay to say no at any time but of course I will be told that I am naive about this although you hear stories about women feeling pressurised into continuing and not feeling confident to back down and freezing etc.,

You'll still hear those stories, consent classes or none, and while I'm not going to suggest you're naive, I do think the idea of consent classes is misguided and ineffective as it's entirely theoretical and no practical. All they do is contribute to the exaggeration of an issue which every one of it's proponents want people to ignore what they call it, but acknowledge that it exists.

Not confident that the goal is to deamonise sounds like the goal is to be empowering for both sexes but there ya go.

There's nothing empowering about attempting to instill fear and paranoia in anyone, fostering mistrust among people to further your own ideology.

Outlaw Pete

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RAW8Tzt28Ts

All this talk about 'consent' is really just another way of controlling the narrative regarding feminism, as when you're talking about consent, you're talking about rape and when you're talking about rape, you're talking about women in the context that third wave feminists love them to be talked about.. and that is as victims of men. Which is why feminists today never stop talking about sexual consent, as it keeps that dynamic at play and as long as they do that... they are justifying their very existence (and God knows they need to - in western society at least) which ultimately means that they can continue to manipulate society into bending over backwards to appease them, give them what they want and do what it is that they want.

And what's it all for anyway? Where are all these rapists that were just confused about consent? Seems to me anytime I've ever heard of a woman being sexually assaulted or raped, the guy knew exactly what he was doing and there was fcuk all ambiguity about whether or not he was aware that the female was not consenting to what he was doing. Not saying there are not some guys who perhaps should have backed off when a girl was drunk or whatever, but that goes for a lot of women too, same with any groping which people might think was okay, pretty much both sexes could do with a class or three on boundaries in that regard.

Otherwise though, the amount of attention the subject of sexual consent gets is way out of proportion to the actual need for it and it's really just something being used to get attention... and those that do so, know damn well what they're doing. It's just a way for them to keep manipulating society as they know that rape is such a serious subject that if they bring it up, they control the airspace for how ever long they have the floor (given that it silences their detractors - momentarily at least) which is why when LON was on the Tommy T show she broached the subject and started to lecture a man with six kids on sexual consent.

bodice ripper

cloudatlas wrote:

I could probably just state it in plainer English if you're struggling but it sounds like you have beef with your own h.r. department which I can't help you with.

Yeah, we have terrible trouble with the HR department here at the tattoo parlour...

Vela

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RAW8Tzt28Ts

All this talk about 'consent' is really just another way of controlling the narrative regarding feminism, as when you're talking about consent, you're talking about rape and when you're talking about rape, you're talking about women in the context that third wave feminists love them to be talked about.. and that is as victims of men. Which is why feminists today never stop talking about sexual consent, as it keeps that dynamic at play and as long as they do that... they are justifying their very existence (and God knows they need to - in western society at least) which ultimately means that they can continue to manipulate society into bending over backwards to appease them, give them what they want and do what it is that they want.

And what's it all for anyway? Where are all these rapists that were just confused about consent? Seems to me anytime I've ever heard of a woman being sexually assaulted or raped, the guy knew exactly what he was doing and there was fcuk all ambiguity about whether or not he was aware that the female was not consenting to what he was doing. Not saying there are not some guys who perhaps should have backed off when a girl was drunk or whatever, but that goes for a lot of women too, same with any groping which people might think was okay, pretty much both sexes could do with a class or three on boundaries in that regard.
.

This is why I find it so hard to tolerate modern feminists. They are using an extremely serious issue that has affected the lives of many women and men in a life-changing way as fcuking propaganda for their 'cause'. If a guy wants to have sex and initiates it, and a woman refuses or is unable to refuse because of alcohol/drugs/fear for her safety, then this is a clear sexual assault. If a guy wants to have sex and the woman 'goes along' with it because she feels bad about saying no, or she doesn't want to make a scene, or it just 'seems easier', or because she's not sure, and she's not in any actual physical danger - that is not sexual assault, that is someone who is unable to assert themselves and ends up doing something they don't want to do as a result. I highly doubt that's a pleasant experience, but it's not assault. Today's super feminists would tell you that any time a woman has sex and regrets it - it's rape, because she didn't want to have sex. Which is horsesh1t.

Consent classes are also horsesh1t in the way that they've been described to me. What are you going to do if you bring someone home on a Saturday night? Stop halfway through the shift and say 'can I just clarify that you consent to having sex?'. Yeah, I can see a bunch of 19-year olds doing that. Way to kill the mood.

It's easy to go through life without taking responsibility for your actions. It's easy to play the blame game, and that seems to be the mantra of the modern feminist. 'I can behave this way towards men, because look at how men treat women'. I have kind, caring, and respectful men in my life who have helped me through the worst of times. My best friend is a man. My freaking therapist is a man. My little (well not so little anymore) brother. I have also known men who have been abusive, emotionally and physically. I have been a 'victim' of sexual assault. I hate that word and the connations it has now because of this current feminist propaganda. I don't base my opinion of men in general on those experiences - because that would be nuts. One of my male friends was a victim of domestic violence. By a woman. And he doesn't go around tarring all women with the same brush either.

All that these men-hating women are doing, is scare-mongering other women into believing that men are so incredibly different from us. That they're inherently so sex-driven and sexist that we need protection from them. Sorry, but what the fcuk? I don't need protection from men. Men aren't the problem. Rapists are.

The majority of men who push sex, will stop once they're told to stop. The majority of men will not have sex with someone who is in a position where they're unable to consent. Rapists are not the majority of all men.

Rapists don't = all men.
Rapists don't = all women (not that anyone takes that angle)

Rapists are simply rapists. They're fcuked up. They don't care about what they do or the impact of it. They don't care about your fcuking consent classes. They already know what they're doing is wrong.


I am so sick of this sh1t.

Edit: just to clarify one thing in your quote, whilst I agree with most of it - I'm not sure about your remark re: 'some guys should have backed off if a woman was drunk of whatever'. To me, if that's a situation where the woman is too intoxicated to consent or isn't actively engaging (i.e. showing she's unaware of what she's doing) that's assault. There's no maybe about it.