“Ireland has a rape culture”

El_Duderino 09

Reviews and Books Galore wrote: »

It is not in anyway a tiny minority. You hear it in the news, you see it on college campuses and you hear it on the radio. It is most definetly a strong movement in society at the moment to 'teach men not to rape'.

OK. So were discussing this exact topic on this thread and nobody has brought it up (except ironically). I really don't think it's a widely held belief.

OMM 0000

SoupMonster wrote: »

We teach men not to kill, not to steal, not to drive cars when they are drunk, not to clothesline tackle when playing rugby,... the list goes on and on, but for some reason we shouldn't teach them not to rape?

We don't though.

I was never taught not to kill someone.

I was never taught not to steal.

I've seen ads about drink driving, aimed at both sexes, but again I was never taught to not drink and drive.

I've also never received any rugby education.

So I think you're just making this up?

El_Duderino 09

OMM 0000 wrote: »

We don't though.

I was never taught not to kill someone.

I was never taught not to steal.

I've seen ads about drink driving, aimed at both sexes, but again I was never taught to not drink and drive.

I've also never received any rugby education.

So I think you're just making this up?

You've never been told not to drink and drive? OK hold that thought for a second.

There have been numerous multimedia drink driving campaigns. They often end with the phrase "never, ever drink and drive". And you don't consider that telling you not to stink and drive.

So couldn't there easily be discussions about consent and all the nuances therein, without you feeling anyone was told not to rape?

LostinBlanch

Amaris Pitiful Pluto wrote: »

Even RAINN (the Rape, Abuse, and Incest National Network in the United States) has repudiated the existence of "rape culture," writing to a White House task force on campus sexual violence that:

In the last few years, there has been an unfortunate trend towards blaming “rape culture” for the extensive problem of sexual violence on campus. While it is helpful to point out the systemic barriers to addressing the problem, it is important not to 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.

The notion of "rape culture" was invented by fringe campus feminists in the US so that they could implicate all men in the crimes of a few. Even though American feminists have successfully exported their well-funded ideology all over the world by this stage, that still doesn't give it any objective basis in actual reality.

I think it's time to point out (again) that even RAINN doesn't agree that there is such a thing as rape culture. That should be the end of the argument there IMO.

Justin Credible Darts

SoupMonster wrote: »

If they had, what's the problem?

We teach men not to kill, not to steal, not to drive cars when they are drunk, not to clothesline tackle when playing rugby,... the list goes on and on, but for some reason we shouldn't teach them not to rape?

Nonsense.


If you have kids be they male or female, that need to be told or taught that killing is wrong, or stealing is wrong, or rape is wrong etc, I would think those kids are not well adjusted and it does not bode well.
Compassion, decency, care etc are something a balanced person should have.

Calhoun

LostinBlanch wrote: »

I
That should be the end of the argument there IMO. Unless there are further agendas at play here and this is just being used as a stick to beat men with.

Indeed this is really what this is about, you only have to look at the case of the female teacher who committed statutory rape on a student and was jailed in the past week or so to see the hypocrisy.

Allot of very soft articles, which seemed to imply a mistake was made because she thought the age of consent was 16.

El_Duderino 09

Calhoun wrote: »

Indeed this is really what this is about, you only have to look at the case of the female teacher who committed statutory rape on a student and was jailed in the past week or so to see the hypocrisy.

Allot of very soft articles, which seemed to imply a mistake was made because she thought the age of consent was 16.

Right. And she was convicted and sentenced accordingly. I saw articles state she said she made a mistake because the age of consent is 16. I didn't see any articles say she ought to be found not guilty because of it.

I really think this particular case takes a massive dose of victim hood on your part to believe that implies bias against your gender. The outcome of the case demonstrates the opposite.

El_Duderino 09

Justin Credible Darts wrote: »

Nonsense.


If you have kids be they male or female, that need to be told or taught that killing is wrong, or stealing is wrong, or rape is wrong etc, I would think those kids are not well adjusted and it does not bode well.
Compassion, decency, care etc are something a balanced person should have.

You don't think parents of small children have to reinforce behaviours like waiting your turn instead of taking things? What is discussion connected to reality at all or can we all just say whatever we want?

Justin Credible Darts

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

You don't think parents of small children have to reinforce behaviours like waiting your turn instead of taking things? What is discussion connected to reality at all or can we all just say whatever we want?

are you actually comparing things like kids having to learn to "wait their turn" with "rape, and murder"


I do not know what went through your mind as a kid, but my whole being knew that killing was wrong , and attacking people was not right.
As I said if you need to be told that its wrong in order to realize it, it says a lot about that person.

suicide_circus

i think some of this comes from the "blank slate" theory of humans - that everything from your gender to your propensity to violence is caused by environment and socialisation.

its like "pray the gay away" except its "teach the rape away"

I think it's more of this escaping of personal responsibility for their own safety. It's like the women who complain that they get approached by the 'wrong' kind of guys when they dress sexy, and get drunk alone in bars. It's the way that simple common sense has been relegated to the background. Go to a hotel room with someone you've just met? Oh, not risky in the slightest. Last year, I went to a hotel with a woman I met in a bar, and was greeted with two guys in the room, who tried to mug me. I was lucky that i was bigger, and capable of leaving the room without being hurt much. The risks are there for men, but we generally have a greater chance of extracting ourselves from such messes.

I know a woman who complains all the time that she can't meet any nice guys. She's fairly good looking, and has a great body. She dresses very aggressively with very short skirts and revealing tops. Fair enough, except that she always seeks out the more "alpha" kind of guys. She gets drunk with groups of guys in bars and clubs, and declares quite publicly that if guys can engage in casual sex, then so too can she. She's very outspoken about her lifestyle and the manner in which she talks about guys is similar to the way male players/PUA talk about women. And yet, she's not responsible for anything that happens to her. Surrounding herself with guys looking for sex isn't her fault, nor is her openness about casual sex attracting the wrong kind of guys. Being perceived as being open and "easy" isn't her fault, nor is the damage to her reputation among those on the dating circuit.

The problem is that most men are aware of how their behavior affects others. We're aware that many situations are risky, but we have the physical strength/intimidation to get out of those messes. They're calculated risks that we've experienced previously and while we make mistakes, we learn to hedge out bets somewhat. However, with women these days, they expect to engage in risky behavior and not have any protection if they meet a dodgy/dangerous character. No responsibility for what happens, because regardless of how the situation develops, she'll be a victim and blameless.

My sister used to get drunk with the lads, but always had a group of female/male friends to take care of her. She didn't rely on any one person, but the group protected each other. She didn't go back to hotel rooms with strangers, and dated extensively before becoming intimate with guys. In some circles, that might be considered old fashioned and traditional, but it sure was safer than what so many women seek these days.

We really should be encouraging a message of personal safety and an approach of common sense to life. It's simply not safe for a woman to behave the same way as a guy would, and these kind of initiatives are not going to change that. The risks are simply too high.

El_Duderino 09

Justin Credible Darts wrote: »

are you actually comparing things like kids having to learn to "wait their turn" with "rape, and murder"

As I said if you need to be told that its wrong in order to realize it, it says a lot about that person.

No. I equated waiting your turn and not taking things with being taught how to behave and not stealing - you mentioned stealing in your post.

All children have to be taught not to take things they want. It's ubiquitous amongst children and normal to teach them how to do things properly.

El_Duderino 09

suicide_circus wrote: »

i think some of this comes from the "blank slate" theory of humans - that everything from your gender to your propensity to violence is caused by environment and socialisation.

its like "pray the gay away" except its "teach the rape away"

Are you seriously suggesting children don’t need to be taught things like sharing, not taking things that aren’t theirs? Those behaviours are looked upon poorly by peers and parents (positive reinforcement with a negative stimulus). Parents react by telling the child off and peers react by telling off and if the behaviour persists, ostracising the offender. These are “being taught” not to steal.

I haven’t suggested blank slates. It’s a mix of nature and nurture. Whether you like it and recognise it or not, children are taught what is and isn’t acceptable behaviour re stealing. Be serious for minute and you’ll see that as an obvious fact. It might be inconvenient because of the way some people have set themselves in opposition to discussing consent with young people and have used stealing as an example of things that don’t need to be taught to children. But it’s actually pretty obvious.

Reviews and Books Galore

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Are you seriously suggesting children don’t need to be taught things like sharing, not taking things that aren’t theirs? Those behaviours are looked upon poorly by peers and parents (positive reinforcement with a negative stimulus). Parents react by telling the child off and peers react by telling off and if the behaviour persists, ostracising the offender. These are “being taught” not to steal.

I haven’t suggested blank slates. It’s a mix of nature and nurture. Whether you like it and recognise it or not, children are taught what is and isn’t acceptable behaviour re stealing. Be serious for minute and you’ll see that as an obvious fact. It might be inconvenient because of the way some people have set themselves in opposition to discussing consent with young people and have used stealing as an example of things that don’t need to be taught to children. But it’s actually pretty obvious.

Violent rape is an abberant in the same way that violent torture is an abberant. Comparing it to not shaving, cutting in line* is wrong tbh.



*It's also interesting that on this thread it's being compared to 'naughty boy' behaviour.

El_Duderino 09

Reviews and Books Galore wrote: »

Violent rape is an abberant in the same way that violent torture is an abberant. Comparing it to not shaving, cutting in line* is wrong tbh.



*It's also interesting that on this thread it's being compared to 'naughty boy' behaviour.

2things of note.

1. Some posters (including yourself?) have said people don't need to be taught things like not raping, murdering or stealing. I think it's actually obvious that children are explicitly taught not to steal and taught how to behave through a combination of positive and negative reinforcement when examples of stealing occur. Murder is a much more extreme and less common occurrence than stealing so it it taught in the abstract sense because there aren't everyday practical examples to learn from. But children are obviously told that violence and murder are wrong and they ought not do it.

2. I haven't used gender in any of my examples or arguments. I'm sure you'll acknowledge that at least.

Sittingpretty

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

2things of note.

1. Some posters (including yourself?) have said people don't need to be taught things like not raping, murdering or stealing. I think it's actually obvious that children are explicitly taught not to steal and taught how to behave through a combination of positive and negative reinforcement when examples of stealing occur. Murder is a much more extreme and less common occurrence than stealing so it it taught in the abstract sense because there aren't everyday practical examples to learn from. But children are obviously told that violence and murder are wrong and they ought not do it.

2. I haven't used gender in any of my examples or arguments. I'm sure you'll acknowledge that at least.

Did you require being taught not to rape?

Did any of the decent men in today’s society require being taught not to rape?

I think it’s an absolute affront to decent men to blanket suggest that they need to be taught not to rape.

It’s toxic third wave feminism nonsense.

Reviews and Books Galore

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

2things of note.

1. Some posters (including yourself?) have said people don't need to be taught things like not raping, murdering or stealing. I think it's actually obvious that children are explicitly taught not to steal and taught how to behave through a combination of positive and negative reinforcement when examples of stealing occur. Murder is a much more extreme and less common occurrence than stealing so it it taught in the abstract sense because there aren't everyday practical examples to learn from. But children are obviously told that violence and murder are wrong and they ought not do it.

2. I haven't used gender in any of my examples or arguments. I'm sure you'll acknowledge that at least.

I'll give you that. You do try and keep things gender neutral to my memory/knowledge.

El_Duderino 09

Reviews and Books Galore wrote: »

I'll give you that. You do try and keep things gender neutral to my memory/knowledge.

Thank you.

Any comment on the first point on the first point? Specifically the fact that children are actually taught what is and isn't acceptable behaviour re ownership, sharing and stealing.

El_Duderino 09

Sittingpretty wrote: »

Did you require being taught not to rape?

Did any of the decent men in today’s society require being taught not to rape?

I think it’s an absolute affront to decent men to blanket suggest that they need to be taught not to rape.

I'd point to 2 specific points raised in the last few pages. They are posters specifically saying they were never taught not to steal and not to drink and drive. I think those are two very obvious cases of people just forgetting they were ever taught and assuming they just had innate knowledge not to steal of drink and drive.

I'd also say that rape is an extreme and infrequent occurrence. But obviously I was taught that it's wrong through my caregivers' reaction to hearing about rape. That's how children learn about things in the abstract. They see others reactions, and later they will see the response to rape is abhorrance (positive reinforcement of a negative stimulus) and the reaction to rape in weider society includes arrest, trial and sentencing.

It's impossible to look at all that and say I was never taught that rape is wrong.

We learn what's acceptable or not from our culture and caregivers and peers etc. That's why what's acceptable can change. Not long ago it was grand to Wolf whistle at people in the street. Now that's called Street harassment and it's not positively reinforced with positive stimulus anymore.

So the short answer is I was taught that rape is not acceptable (and so we're most people) so I can't really say whether I needed to be taught or not.

Reviews and Books Galore

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Thank you.

Any comment on the first point on the first point? Specifically the fact that children are actually taught what is and isn't acceptable behaviour re ownership, sharing and stealing.

I have already tackled it by saying that violent rape is an abberant in society rather than something that needs to be regulated? I feel like this has happened twice now where I answered the question and you kind of missed the answer

El_Duderino 09

Reviews and Books Galore wrote: »

I have already tackled it by saying that violent rape is an abberant in society rather than something that needs to be regulated? I feel like this has happened twice now where I answered the question and you kind of missed the answer

Yeah. And I think you missed the bit where I explain how things are taught and learned to be abhorrent. It's not all innate. It's an interplay of nature, nurture and environment

[Deleted User]

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I think it's more of this escaping of personal responsibility for their own safety. It's like the women who complain that they get approached by the 'wrong' kind of guys when they dress sexy, and get drunk alone in bars. It's the way that simple common sense has been relegated to the background. Go to a hotel room with someone you've just met? Oh, not risky in the slightest. Last year, I went to a hotel with a woman I met in a bar, and was greeted with two guys in the room, who tried to mug me. I was lucky that i was bigger, and capable of leaving the room without being hurt much. The risks are there for men, but we generally have a greater chance of extracting ourselves from such messes.

I know a woman who complains all the time that she can't meet any nice guys. She's fairly good looking, and has a great body. She dresses very aggressively with very short skirts and revealing tops. Fair enough, except that she always seeks out the more "alpha" kind of guys. She gets drunk with groups of guys in bars and clubs, and declares quite publicly that if guys can engage in casual sex, then so too can she. She's very outspoken about her lifestyle and the manner in which she talks about guys is similar to the way male players/PUA talk about women. And yet, she's not responsible for anything that happens to her. Surrounding herself with guys looking for sex isn't her fault, nor is her openness about casual sex attracting the wrong kind of guys. Being perceived as being open and "easy" isn't her fault, nor is the damage to her reputation among those on the dating circuit.

The problem is that most men are aware of how their behavior affects others. We're aware that many situations are risky, but we have the physical strength/intimidation to get out of those messes. They're calculated risks that we've experienced previously and while we make mistakes, we learn to hedge out bets somewhat. However, with women these days, they expect to engage in risky behavior and not have any protection if they meet a dodgy/dangerous character. No responsibility for what happens, because regardless of how the situation develops, she'll be a victim and blameless.

My sister used to get drunk with the lads, but always had a group of female/male friends to take care of her. She didn't rely on any one person, but the group protected each other. She didn't go back to hotel rooms with strangers, and dated extensively before becoming intimate with guys. In some circles, that might be considered old fashioned and traditional, but it sure was safer than what so many women seek these days.

We really should be encouraging a message of personal safety and an approach of common sense to life. It's simply not safe for a woman to behave the same way as a guy would, and these kind of initiatives are not going to change that. The risks are simply too high.

One or two more steps and you're a time traveller from the 1950's.

There's nothing wrong with casual sex for either gender. There's no need to extensively date before becoming intimate. There's nothing wrong with being perceived as open or "easy". The muggers are to blame in your scenario for the attempted mugging.

While I agree that personal responsibility is important in any walk of life, you really think women have zero of this? Going around without a care in the world?? I hate to use such a phrase but I've never seen such an obvious example, you are mansplaining.

Reviews and Books Galore

Deleted User wrote: »

One or two more steps and you're a time traveller from the 1950's.

There's nothing wrong with casual sex for either gender. There's no need to extensively date before becoming intimate. There's nothing wrong with being perceived as open or "easy". The muggers are to blame in your scenario for the attempted mugging.

While I agree that personal responsibility is important in any walk of life, you really think women have zero of this? Going around without a care in the world?? I hate to use such a phrase but I've never seen such an obvious example, you are mansplaining.

So he's using his priveledge as a man to explain about topics that he has no understanding of*?



Tbh, I just see somebody explaining there opinion rather than talking down to anybody from the 'father' position that society gave men.



*Which is actually quite a sexist and bellitling.

Reviews and Books Galore

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Yeah. And I think you missed the bit where I explain how things are taught and learned to be abhorrent. It's not all innate. It's an interplay of nature, nurture and environment

Oh, calm down El Dude. I'm going to agree to disagree here as I see some behaviours as 'taught' and some behaviours as intriniscaly abhorrent to human cultures.

El_Duderino 09

Reviews and Books Galore wrote: »

Oh, calm down El Dude. I'm going to agree to disagree here as I see some behaviours as 'taught' and some behaviours as intriniscaly abhorrent to human cultures.

Which ones are taught and which ones are innate and don’t need to be discussed? For example, if nobody ever discussed rape, would everyone come to the same understanding and conclusions re rape?

If you don’t acknowledge that children are in reality taught how to behave re everyday things like stealing and more abstract things like rape, then I’m not sure what level of reality were working on in this discussion.

Irish Guitarist

The Nirvana song Polly is about the rape of a teenage girl from the perspective of the rapist. It's based on a news story Kurt Cobain read. There's an interview with him where he talks about teaching men not to rape. He genuinely seemed to believe that this song was going to make rapists think twice about raping. I can't find the interview on its own but there's snippets of it somewhere in this video (which is kind of annoying and hard to listen to).

After the album became massively successful two scumbags raped another teenage girl while singing this song.

He meant well and all and it's a great song, but it was never going to stop rapists from raping.

El_Duderino 09

Irish Guitarist wrote: »

The Nirvana song Polly is about the rape of a teenage girl from the perspective of the rapist. It's based on a news story Kurt Cobain read. There's an interview with him where he talks about teaching men not to rape. He genuinely seemed to believe that this song was going to make rapists think twice about raping. I can't find the interview on its own but there's snippets of it somewhere in this video (which is kind of annoying and hard to listen to).

After the album became massively successful two scumbags raped another teenage girl while singing this song.

He meant well and all and it's a great song, but it was never going to stop rapists from raping.

Interesting. So if at any point someone says the best way to discuss consent or rape is through song, not dialogue with children in an ongoing and age appropriate discussions or any other method except a single song, then I'll be sure to remind them of this incident. Until that happens, it's probably not altogether that relevant though, is it?

Irish Guitarist

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Interesting. So if at any point someone says the best way to discuss consent or rape is through song, not dialogue with children in an ongoing and age appropriate discussions or any other method except a single song, then I'll be sure to remind them of this incident. Until that happens, it's probably not altogether that relevant though, is it?

Do what you like. I couldn't give a shit. As I said before you don't own the thread and I'll post whatever opinion I like. There's no point in explaining how it is relevant because you'll keep responding with the same annoying claptrap.

Also you're not a moderator so give over trying to police how I choose to respond to a thread. You didn't even start this thread.

Lewis_Benson

What's a rape culture?

El_Duderino 09

Irish Guitarist wrote: »

Do what you like. I couldn't give a shit. As I said before you don't own the thread and I'll post whatever opinion I like. There's no point in explaining how it is relevant because you'll keep responding with the same annoying claptrap.

Ok. But probably no point getting upset when someone responds to your post though.