Skepchick Quickies 12.21

Skepchick Quickies 12.21
Amanda is a science grad student in Boston whose favorite pastimes are having friendly debates and running amok.

266 Comments

  1. The “Nice guys” of OKCupid page creeps me out, not because of the few creepy men but because I find it sadistic and irresponsible. There isn’t any segregation of “possible rapist” warnings from the mocking of socially conservative men. Anti-gay or man-who-thinks-he-should-be-head-of-household does not equal violent criminal. I also think it’s too below-the-belt to post content of dating sites publicly in most circumstances, even if anyone can register for an OKCupid membership.

    • wait, where does that tumblr page say these guys are possible rapist. I mean I’ve only gone like three pages in, but I’ve yet to see any claim from the creator that these guys might rape someone.

    • oops, I saw the rape tags she added to some of the post.

      but you know what? I agree with her, if at any time you think a woman is required to have sex with you… then yes, that’s pretty much condoning rape.

    • Someone who states “I believe a woman is obligated to have sex with me” – they are a rapist. Or a would-be rapist. Either way, don’t you think, perhaps, you should be more concerned with the fact that some men think women are obligated to have sex with them? Are you AT ALL concerned about that? Consider that questino honestly. Something tells me, you’re more worried about the poor little rapists. Boo-ooh.

      • “Someone who states “I believe a woman is obligated to have sex with me” – they are a rapist. Or a would-be rapist.”

        Not necessarily, because thinking someone has an obligation isn’t the same as thinking one has a right to force them to do it. For example, let’s say John Doe visits a prostitute (imagine prostitution is legal here), pays in advance, and they both sign a contract laying out the terms of the transaction. If the prostitute fails to deliver, and cannot or will not return the money, she’s broken a legal obligation to have sex with John Doe.

        John Doe might think it’s ok to take her to court for violating the contract (and thus the obligation), while at the same time thinking it would still be wrong to rape her.

        Or, we could look at moral obligations. If one is a consequentialist, one would think that a woman would have an obligation to have sex with John Doe Jr. if it’s the only way to prevent a hundred rapes and a hundred murders down the road. But again, this doesn’t mean that John Doe Jr. has to think he’s justified in enforcing the obligation on her. He can merely think that she’s broken her obligation. Similar situations apply for most ethical systems (except Kantian ones).

        To answer the question myself, yes, I do think that there are some (albeit rare) circumstances in which someone would be obligated to have sex with me – but I wouldn’t dream of enforcing it myself. Thus, I’m neither a rapist nor a would-be rapist nor an arbiter of other people’s actions, faulty though they may be.

        TLDR: A’s obligation doesn’t necessarily grant B enforcement rights. Duh.

        • What the fuck, man? Are you serious? Here, the definition of obligated:

          1.An act or course of action to which a person is morally or legally bound; a duty or commitment.
          2.The condition of being morally or legally bound to do something.

          Synonyms
          duty – responsibility – commitment – engagement – bond

          Do you even know what the fucking word MEANS?

          As someone who was in a 2+ abusive relationship with a man who felt I was OBLIGATED to have sex with him, and when I didn’t, he would punish or FORCE me to have sex with me — meaning I didn’t have a fucking say in the matter — I will tell you right now: IT WAS RAPE.

          And you’re a piece of shit. NO ONE IS EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER OBLIGATED TO HAV SEX WITH SOMEONE ELSE FOR ANY REASON WHATSOEVER. NONE. ZERO. ZILCH.

          “Rare”? Really? It’s rare? The fact that you sat and considered a situation in which it’d be okay for you to rape someone is really disgusting. You’re a piece of work.

          Note, too, that rapists ALWAYS have to come up with some fucking hypothetical situation to fit into their little rapey world-view.

          Yeah, well, I’ve really, really been raped. It wasn’t hypothetical.

          Fuck you.

          • ” The fact that you sat and considered a situation in which it’d be okay for you to rape someone is really disgusting. You’re a piece of work.”

            This is the opposite of what I said. Let’s try this again:

            To answer the question myself, yes, I do think that there are some (albeit rare) circumstances in which someone would be obligated to have sex with me – but I wouldn’t dream of enforcing it myself. Thus, I’m neither a rapist nor a would-be rapist nor an arbiter of other people’s actions, faulty though they may be.

            “Note, too, that rapists ALWAYS have to come up with some fucking hypothetical situation to fit into their little rapey world-view.”

            Once again, I am neither a rapist nor a would-be rapist, but the hypotheticals are called for in light of the okcupid question, “Do you feel there are any circumstances in which a person is obligated to have sex with you?”. To properly answer this question, we have to look at the spectrum of all possible circumstances.

          • To answer the question myself, yes, I do think that there are some (albeit rare) circumstances in which someone would be obligated to have sex with me – but I wouldn’t dream of enforcing it myself.

            Fuck off, rape apologist and possible rapist.

            And, no, that wasn’t the oposite of what you said. I know what you said: YOU JUST SAID IT WAS OKAY TO RAPE SOMEONE, and you made up some compeltely ridiculous story to back up your justification of rape.

            You’re a rape apologist. At least fucking own it.

            Gross.

            “Do you feel there are any circumstances in which a person is obligated to have sex with you?”. To properly answer this question, we have to look at the spectrum of all possible circumstances.

            Can you come up with some, I don’t know, REAL WORLD examples? And is your example legally sound? I am going with a huge, fat no. And it’s YOUR JOB to back your ridiuclous claims up, so get to it: Prove to me that your ridiculous example is even legally possible.

            Why is it that whenever the question of rape comes up, the creepy assholes have to come out to outlilne weirdly specific, outlandish examples of who it just may be possible for them to rape someone?!

            And, no, HYPOTHETICAL SITUATIONS DO NOT PROVE SHIT, HOLY FUCK. Why is it that “skeptics” suddenly resort to stupid debate tactits when the subject is rape? WHY?

          • And it’s rather interesting that you totally and utterly ignored the definition of obligation.

            You’re a rape apologist. Perhaps even a rapist.

            Oh, maybe you’re not a rapist? How would I know? You just condoned rape. For my safety, I shall from here on out consider you a rapist. Don’t like it? Stop acting like a fucking rapist.

            You know, if you have to assure us that NO I AM REALLY NOT A RAPIST, I SWEAR! then perhaps, just perhaps, you need to reconsider your fucking point of view.

            Becuase that man who felt I was obligated to have sex with him? CAME UP WITH EVERY REASON UNDER THE BOOK.

            I was unemployed and so he was paying for my rent (even though he would have been paying rent for the shitty apartment even if I wasn’t there), which he used as a way to coerce me into fucking him even when I didn’t want to. Then, when I refused, he would pick me up and put me outside. He threatened to kick me out. So I would “let him” rape me. But apparently obligation in your world doesn’t actually mean I HAD TO! I mean, I could have just left, right? Slept on the streets?

            For the record, my ex-best friend recently told me I wasn’t actually raped and that I had a choice of living on the streets, and therefore I wasn’t raped.

            Guess you agree with him, hm? Since I had other “choices” it really wasn’t rape.

            Fuck you. You’re gross.

          • Looks like you’re just going to continue seeing what you want to see instead of actually reading what I wrote. So for the last time,

            I am neither a rapist nor a would-be rapist. Rape is wrong. Obligations and enforcement of obligations are not the same thing.

            I don’t know how to be any clearer than this. If you continue to rail on about how “rapey” I am despite me being perfectly clear about this three times now, then anyone with sense is just going to laugh at your ridiculous antics.

          • No one is fucking laughing.

            If you don’t want to be called a possible rapist, THEN DO NOT CONDONE RAPE.

            You haven’t answered even ONE of my specific questions. You just keep repeating the same bullshit.

            Am I supposed to AGREE with you that rape is totally okay in some “rare” cases when you used such a ridiculous, outlandish, legally shaky example?!

            Hypothetical situations are not going to fucking sway me.

            If you continue to use HYPOTHETICAL SITUATIONS to prove that it’s okay to sometimes rape, people are going to fucking laugh at you. Or call you a rapist.

          • And you ignored my ACTUAL, real-world example! HOW SURPRISING! It’s quite parralel to yours. My boyfriend was paying for my rent. Was I then obligated to have sex with him?

        • And fucking seriously, why is it that, in these discussions, people (usually men) have to resort to INCREDIBALLY outlandish, unralistic anologies, to justify why it’s “seriously, dude, sometimes it’s okay!” to rape someone?!

          Not necessarily, because thinking someone has an obligation isn’t the same as thinking one has a right to force them to do it. For example, let’s say John Doe visits a prostitute (imagine prostitution is legal here), pays in advance, and they both sign a contract laying out the terms of the transaction. If the prostitute fails to deliver, and cannot or will not return the money, she’s broken a legal obligation to have sex with John Doe.

          And do you have any actual legal leg to stand on here? Anything to prove that such a contract would even BE FUCKING LEGAL?

          I can’t google this shit at work, but I’m pretty sure a prostitue is NOT OBLIGBATED to have sex with you, even if you paid her beforehand. If you paid a prostitute, and she suddenly decided, “NO” and you continue anyway? YOU ARE RAPING HER. PERIOD. END OF DISCUSSION.

          And, nice. You had to come up with some fucking ridiculous, legally shaky hypothetical situation to someone “prove” that maybe you can rape someone and it’d be okay. HOW ABOUT NO.

          And how about EW.

          • Clearly I cannot close tags today.

            But, wow. What a weak, terrible, sexist, disgusting analogy.

          • Good for you Marilove.

            In metalogic’s smug, insulated view of the world there is no rape culture.

            He just came up against it in the shape of you yourself.

            But after all, you are only a figment of the internet, not a flesh and blood human being.

            How long will he continue in denial?

          • Marilove, FWIW this tends to support your contention re the legal issues

            http://anj.sagepub.com/content/40/2/127.abstract

            Only an abstract but I thought a quick response was needed

          • THANK YOU. There are other sources for this sort of thing, but I can’t look right now. UGH.

          • I’m pretty sure that if a prostitute accepts money for a service but does not perform it, she doesn’t owe the guy sex. She owes him money.

            I’m surprised nobody has brought up time travel in any of these hypotheticals.

        • Why in the Flying Spaghetti Monster’s name would you choose to misinterpret these mens words as favourably as possible?

          There is no reason in all the world to assume they mean under extremely magically narrow circumstances only and don’t intend to act on it. None at all.

          Your rape apologist apologism beggars the imagination.

          • I made no strict interpretations. I said “not necessarily”. You’re right that there’s no reason to assume that all the answerers mean only under narrow circumstances – but there’s also no reason to assume they mean it in broad circumstances either. All any of us can do is speculate. I was just giving counterexamples to marilove’s “always a rapist” interpretation.

          • Prostitutes are in no way obligated to fuck their clients. If a prostitute were to say “no”, then that client must stop (or not start), no matter hwat — otherwise it is rape. Your analogy doesn’t even hold water.

            Unless you can somehow prove to me that legally, that prostitute would have been required to actually fuck her client. Oh, and your analogy becomes even shakier when you realize that prostitution is generally illegal and CONTRACTS UNDER SUCH CONDITIONS ARE NOT LEGALLY BINDING.

            Your whole argument is ridiculous and outlandish and in no fucking way proves that there are “rare” examples in which rape is totally okay.

        • metalogic42: Hm… Nope. The prostitute in your strained, unreal hypothetical is obligated to return the money she took, and if she can’t/won’t, might be subject to civil action as a result. She might even be criminally libel for fraud. But she’s under no specific obligation to have sex, period. If she returns the money, at any point in time, our hypothetical John is entitled to nothing but his blue-balls.

          • ” The prostitute in your strained, unreal hypothetical is obligated to return the money she took,”

            I don’t think it’s very strained. While prostitution is currently illegal in most of the U.S., it’s a very real possibility that it will be made legal sometime in the future. It’s legal in Nevada now, from what I understand. It’s also legal in the Netherlands. So I could very well see this sort of situation happening.

            But anyway, this actually reinforces my point about the difference between obligation and enforcement of obligation. Of course, marilove would probably say you’re a thief or thief supporter for this comment.

            “and if she can’t/won’t, might be subject to civil action as a result. She might even be criminally libel for fraud.”

            Yes, she would be obligated to return the money – and the reason she would be subject to legal action is precisely because she broke the original legal obligation of fulfilling the terms of the contract. As I’ve previously stated, this doesn’t mean that the customer is within his right to collect by force, just as a sales contract doesn’t mean a ripped off customer is within his right to steal what he paid for and didn’t receive.

        • Yeah, I bet that’s exactly what all those guys who said yes, there are times when women are obligated to have sex with them were thinking. Exactly.

          • Oh, it all makes sense now. The ‘nice guys’ are all looking for hookers. When did OKCupid turn into craigslist or backpage?

        • “To answer the question myself, yes, I do think that there are some (albeit rare) circumstances in which someone would be obligated to have sex with me ”

          I’m sorry you think that way.

          There is NO circumstance in which ANYONE is obligated to have sex with ANYONE.

          EVER.

          Not even in the situations you describe.

          Politicians play this fucked up game constantly.
          Please don’t fall for it.

        • metal, your response is like responding to the question “is Obama the president of the united states?” with a solipsistic tirade about how nothing can be known for sure(aka “going nuclear”)

          you are entirely trolling us

          actually, pondering solipsism has much more merit than what you are doing here.

      • I agree. I don’t have a lot of sympathy for people who even think its okay to force others to have sex with them.

        • Marilove

          Sorry I forgot to mention your name in my reply.

    • “I also think it’s too below-the-belt to post content of dating sites publicly in most circumstances, even if anyone can register for an OKCupid membership.”

      Hahaha, no. As someone who has had an OkCupid account for a while, no. These sites aren’t new. If you are going to CONDONE RAPE on a dating site, then you deserve to be blasted. Just as if condoned rape in public.

      Don’t want to be publicly shamed for condoning rape? Don’t condone rape.

      • To be fair, a lot of those were just creepers being whiny/entitled or expecting women to shave their legs. Douchebaggery that would get you removed from my FB friend list, sure, but this level of shaming seems harsh. The rest absolutely deserve their ‘place in the sun’.

        The focus on leg shaving actually surpised me a lot though. Is the expectation that a women will shave her legs widely considered a serious issue for women? Or was it a personal annoyance of the site’s author? Or just the most common not so nice comment ‘nice guys’ were making?

        • It’s a plain and clear example of sexism. “Nice guys” are always sexist.

          • What does that make the “bad guys” then?

          • “Nice Guys” are always sexist and therefore bad guys. They are one and the same. What kind of question is this? Maybe I’m missing the snark?

        • OH DEAR! We are being so mean to the rape apologists and sexists! How dare we!

        • “Is the expectation that a women will shave her legs widely considered a serious issue for women?”

          The question wasn’t “Do you like it when your partner shaves their legs?” It was: “Do you think WOMEN are OBLIGATED to keep their legs shaved?”

          It’s inherently sexist to say that ALL women have an obligation to perform personal body care that pleases you.

          The correct answer to “Do you like it when your partner shaves their legs?” would be, “Yes, but it’s really up to them.”

  2. If a man thinks he should be “head of the household” what exactly does that mean? How is he going to enforce that exactly? He could break up with her divorce if their married, or other darker possibilities. (Let’s not forget that whole “Should you spank your wife” clipping from the 50s that was posted around a while back.) The whole idea of being head of a household implies that your will trumps that of your woman. That may not necessarily mean violence, but that’s an attitude I myself would take as a threat against my autonomy and well-being. I wouldn’t stick around long enough to find out if I need be worried about my safety.

    • I dated a girl for a long while who genuinely believed the man should be the head of the household. To her it meant that the man should make any substantial family decisions (with advisement from her); like buying a new car, choosing a school for the kid(s), etc. It definitely didn’t mean he could abuse her in any way, or that she wasn’t free to leave the relationship.

      We argued about it. The end result was that she made pretty clear that if we got married I would be the one to make decisions whether I liked it or not. The irony was lost.

      • Something tells me that she would actually have way more control int he relationship than she says, you know? Like, the “head of the household” stuff for many people isn’t necessarily based in (complete) reality. She wanted the illusion of her husband being in control, but I wonder how true that would be. :P

        Humans are weird.

  3. The Slate article on GMO was really bad. The author didn’t seem to understand the difference between an herbicide and an insecticide and seemed unaware that Monsanto’s patent on Round up has expired and generic versions are currently being sold.

    He also made the mistake of blasting Monsanto for developing “Terminator” seeds while at the same time blasting them for having farmers sign an agreement not to collect seed to use for next years crops.

    • You are right. The herbicide/insecticide confusion has happened before though.

      I think the reason is that we are talking about different GMOs but lumping them all together.

      BT corn = insecticide; Roundup resistant corn = herbicide

      Same explanation for your last point.

  4. Darn it! I failed the nice guy test because when it asked if I were a /”nice guy”, I answered no…

  5. Amanda,

    Thanks for the bit on Alan Turing. A pardon is well overdue.

    On a related note, can someone explain to me why the Chinese Room scenerio debunks the Turing test? I could never fully understand John Searle’s argument against AI in this respect.

    And I’ll also ask the following reductionist question even at the risk of getting a volley of barbs from Will. Are humans Turing machines?

    • Someone far more into philosophy than I am will have to respond to that.

    • It’s because the person in the room is creating a response that passes the Turing Test without understanding what he or she is doing. The person submitting the questions get answers that look to him or her like answers that require consciousness, but the process that produces them doesn’t require it and there’s no way for the questioner to know for sure.

      • Agreed. Would it be fair to then say that the neurons in the brain are equivalent to the person in the Chinese room? The neural networks in my head are following subroutines which themselves are not conscious. But collectively that neural activity generates a conscious response to the observer.

        • If you’re saying that the room speaks Chinese and is therefore the consciousness you’re testing for, I don’t know that there’s a good answer for that. Searle’s (I think) just interested in demonstrating that there’s no guarantee of the kind of awareness you’d commonly attribute to yourself when you test for consciousness and there’s no way to get around it.

          I guess that’s true of all the other people you encounter in life, though, and you’d probably deal with this objection in exactly the same way. But I don’t know that he’d mind us coming up with all kinds of crazy models for consciousness, just that you don’t know that there’s an experience behind the other set of eyes that matches yours in any way.

  6. Oh, wait, wait, wait! He’s not talking about whether or not such an example would be legally called rape! oh, nope! That prostitute would instead be MORALLY obligated to have sex with the client because of a hypothetical contract that likely wouldn’t even be legal because generally prostitution is NOT legal and, also, I do not believe one can sign contracts regarding sex – just like one can’t sign contracts giving away an organ. It doesn’t fucking work like that in the real world.

    Oh, but you know, he’s talking about a LEGAL contract, but he’s not talking about whether or not it would be legal to rape someone. JUST MORALLY.

    What the fucking fuck?

    Your analogy is bullshit and you’re a rape apologist.

    • Marilove, you’ve completly ignored the perfectly reasonable example that metalogic42 gave of when it’s OK to force another person to have sex with you.

      “one would think that a woman would have an obligation to have sex with John Doe Jr. if it’s the only way to prevent a hundred rapes and a hundred murders down the road.”

      Sounds like a plausible reason to me.

      Honestly, a stupid joke is the only way I can handle dealing with this piece of stit.

      • Yeah. I just COMPLETELY ignored that analogy because HOLY SHIT WHAT? It isn’t even fucking plausible.

        And holy shit, why does the WOMAN have an OBLIGATION to get raped? Why doesn’t the man have an OBLIGATION NOT TO RAPE?

        This is what pisses me off the most. Women, apparently, may be obligated to have sex (be raped) in some rare, weird, outlandish, hypothetical situation, but the men are NEVER obligated NOT TO RAPE.

        It’s disgusting and a great example of rape culture.

        • And I just realized that I fell into their trap of saying “force/ coerce someone to have sex with you” instead of rape. They’ll use all kinds of different terms, but won’t use the R word.

        • If my fiance promised me a good night when she got home, then changed her mind and watched tv all night, I would (1) think she was morally obligated to live up to her word and (2) would be really annoyed. It would not make me a rapist, unless I forced her to have sex.

          • You should definitely let your fiancee know that you think that before you marry her.

          • Reply is down-thread.

            But the fact that you would feel morally ENTITLED to have sex with someone WHO DOES NOT WANT TO HAVE SEX WITH YOU is pretty fucked up.

            You do realize that rapists feel entitled to have “sex” (rape) people who do not want to have sex, right?

            So, you’re okay with COERCING and MANIPULATING someone to have sex with you (getting annoyed, pouting, making it clear that she is MORALLY OBLIGATED to have sex with you even if she changes her mind) even if they don’t want to?

            Yeah. That’d make you a rapist. I lived with someone like you for two years.

  7. Do those OK Cupid guys think that those profiles will make them seem attractive to women? “I resent women because of their power to deny me sex. Please have sex with me.”

  8. I used to have a really nice black felt fedora. I miss it… ;( I didn’t realize it was the hallmark of a “nice guy”.

    • Then again, I’m 44, married for almost a decade and a father of three… I think I’ll where whatever I want. But yeah, some of thos guys should definitely look into caps or perhaps a nice derby.

    • I like fedoras, myself. I mean, not on douches. But if you can pull it off, rock it, I say. It’s just a hat! (I like when guys where hats :)).

  9. Maybe those guys are talking about an apocalyptic scenario where the species needs to be repopulated?
    Or, maybe you’re space travelers and encounter evil aliens who can only be defeated by boning?
    Or what if the guy has a rare fatal disease that can only be cured by ejaculating in a specific woman’s vagina?
    See, there are perfectly cromulent reasons why a woman would be obligated to have sex.

    • What if you were hiding politically persecuted people in your attic and the only way to save them was by having sex?
      What then, tumblr? What then!?

  10. Ok, I’e lost the last half an hour on that Tumblr. One interesting common thread? All these guys are sick of being “friendzoned” yet a large number of them can’t seem to find any friends who can take their fricking ok cupid picture for them. Seriously, ladies, don’t date anyone who thinks “dude in the bathroom mirror” is a good look.

  11. I used to get confused by the whole dating scene. Didn’t get it at all. I knew girls. I would watch them go out to bars to meet the kinds of guys they would meet in bars, date them a while, then call them assholes and never see them again.
    And I wondered: I’m not an asshole; there must be other non-assholes; how come they aren’t dating non-assholes like me?
    I guess I could have sailed down the River Douche and been all: “I’m so nice! Why don’t girls show up at my door and have sex with me!? Call the waaaambulance!”
    But I didn’t.
    I realized I was just – let’s be honest – a coward when it came to talking to girls I was attracted to.
    What these cowards have done, and I believe cowardice is a major problem (“fear leads to hate” – Yoda), is used super-crazy-rationalization to conflate their lack of sexual progress with some intentional conspiracy on the part of women, rather than look inwards. Anything is better than looking inwards.
    Bitterness, loneliness, and low self-esteem (caused by the deep-seated belief that you deserve your loneliness for being such a coward) can be a potent cocktail.
    Brew that in a cauldron for a couple of lonely years, kick it over and make your contribution to the River Douche. Now sprinkle on some Internet and watch the whole frothing mess flood over its levees.
    But maybe I took that metaphor too far.

    • I can totally relate to your story.

      And I think the metaphor works great.

      What sucks about it is that a solution to all that is more elusive than the Higgs boson (from my view, anyway).

      • Well I think the answer is a bit of coaching. A lot of these dudes with a little help on how to talk to women like regular people with the intent of just getting to know them (and not just love/sex) would go a long way.

        • Yeah. I mean what would have happened if I’d fallen in with a bunch of douchebag pick up artists? What if they had ‘coached’ me on how things really are? Would I have sunk into the River Douche and spouted forth its wisdom like many of the Nozzles on Ok Cupid?
          I hope that I would have seen through it, but you never know. I was a pretty naive teenager, especially when it came to, y’know, women.

          • Well PUAs are focused on sex. I think some simple courses that teach guys how to simply talk and form friendships with women as well as talk about sexism and respect would help.

        • Given that my skills to talk to ANYONE (beyond the internet anyway) suck, I think I see where my problem is.

          Still when I do start, I have no issue with speaking to someone as a regular person.

          Hate to think if there was a case of an irregular person.

          • Still when I do start, I have no issue with speaking to someone as a regular person. Hate to think if there was a case of an irregular person.

            Well the issue is that a lot of the nice guys see women as fundamentally different. And that’s the problem.

    • Fantastic.

      And, of course, before a troll pops in: It doesn’t mean women can’t be assholes, too. And sometimes assholes attract other assholes.

      • Too bad assholes don’t behave like electrical charges.

        Oh, and to reply to your reply to my question, I was the one that missed the snark. Didn’t realize Amanda meant THOSE “Nice Guys”.

  12. dtkgreg “But maybe I took that metaphor too far”

    Not far enough. I was waiting in fascination for the River Douche to meet the Fountain of Splooge and flow down to the Delta of……

    Never mind.

    • And the Frothing Levees – I think we might have a kick ass amusement park ride.

      • With maybe some sporns and a TYRRANOSAUROUS?

  13. The Friend Zone. It is impossible for anyone to put you in the Friend Zone. You go there yourself. There’s two ways in. Either you like someone that you don’t ask out, or you asked someone out, they said no, and you decided to hang around them anyway. That’s not a very nice thing to do if you don’t really want to be their friend. It’s the less pushy version of not getting the hint.

    The only thing the other person has control of is their answer. They don’t get to decide if you will ask them out and they don’t get to decide how you will respond to their answer.

    If you want to leave the Friend Zone, ask that person out. If they say no, don’t hang around hoping they’ll change their mind. It’s that easy.

    I should get a douchy hair cut, put on some of my raver clothes, get a packer and say this stuff at men’s conferences.

    • And you know what? It’s PERFECTLY OKAY to feel sad and rejected and all that. I think maybe sometimes people feel like we’re saying they have to be “totally okay” with it. Rejection sucks. But maybe use it as a way to learn, instead of becoming bitter. And if it happens a lot, it might be time to figure out why.

      And full disclosure: I’m pretty shitty at relationships and I’m still trying to figure out why. I’m no angel. But at least I know that and I don’t make excuses.

      • So many men seem to think women are never rejected or lonely or awkward. I don’t know those women.

        • I remember a woman friend making that complaint about the Harry Potter series, sometime around when Harry was making his first mistakes with Cho Chang and Hermione spent a good chunk of the novel explaining what he’d done wrong (since Harry had no clue).
          Her chief complaint had been, “Y’know … it’s not like women know what’s going on either.”

    • I agree with all this but I want to say, what’s so bad about having a platonic friendship with a woman?

      I have many such friendships, they are absolutely awesome, and they have survived good times and bad, some for decades.

      It’s interesting, it’s fun, it’s beneficial for all. And no, I’m not cheating.

      Where is the downside?

      • Just to nail the point, the use of “friendzone” as a perjorative shits me to tears.

        A friend is precious, more valuable than gold, and should be treated as such. Some of these losers should be thankful they have any friends at all.

        If they stopped whining for a minute and listened to these friends they despise so much, they might learn something useful about love and life.

  14. I like that okcupid link. There are a lot of “nice guys” who complain that they can’t get fifty girls to sleep with them, mostly because they are incompetent around women. But if they really wanted to have fifty girls sleep with the, I’m not sure how nice they really are.

    • It’s because our culture glorifies sex for men as a power/prowess thing. That if you’re able to sleep with that many women, you have power over women. You know, instead of treating them like normal human beings that deserve respect.

      Having sex wtih 50 different people isn’t so much the issue, it’s that men are taught that it’s a conquest and that the women do it because they’re psychologically inferior and can’t help fall for these tricks.

      I think my suggestion that guys should be coached to see and interact with women like they’re just regular people worthy of respect was taken as abrasive, but the problem is, is that a lot of guys see women as something less than regular people and therefore not deserving of respect.

      • I dunno. Much of the frustration men express towards women is in regards to not being successful with them. It is emasculating to be unable to date/be intimate with women.

        I don’t know that I agree that treating women like “regular people” is a solution. I think it is the problem. Guys are coached to treat women like men, and hide all of their emotions and feelings towards them. This leads to a lot of guilt and frustration and dumb statements like “I’m a nice guy who hates women.”

        • What the fuck is this gibberish? What do you mean “treat women like men”? Why not treat PEOPLE LIKE PEOPLE?

          You’re making it seem like women are somehow TOTALLY DIFFERENT from men, and that all men dislike talking about emotions. What the hell? This is all just stupid conjecture.

          Treat us like people. DONE.

          • Treat us like people. DONE.

            Yes, it’s all that needs to be realized. But so many men think very differently. They think that women are less than normal and are biologically born to be crazy, emotional, mean, etc.

            And lots of men cling to these sexist opinions fiercely.

            What I’m suggesting, is something like eh, bootcamp to change this way of thinking among men. Preferably earlier on in their lives so that these opinions don’t gel like cement.

        • //I don’t know that I agree that treating women like “regular people” is a solution. I think it is the problem. Guys are coached to treat women like men, and hide all of their emotions and feelings towards them. This leads to a lot of guilt and frustration and dumb statements like “I’m a nice guy who hates women.”//

          Well, the problem is that guys think of women as born with biologically different brains who need separate treatment. That’s bullshit. And it’s what creates a lot of sexist actions.

          I mean holy shit, just think about what’s being said here, “treat women like normal people”, it’s sad that that even HAS to be said. But so many men need to hear it.

          People are just people.

        • Edward, just for reference, I’ve turned your statement into one about race instead of sex. Listen to how it sounds, and then re-think about what you said.

          ———————-
          I dunno. Much of the frustration white people express towards black people is in regards to not being successful with them. It is emasculating to be unable to date/be intimate with black people.

          I don’t know that I agree that treating black people like “regular people” is a solution. I think it is the problem. White People are coached to treat black people like white people, and hide all of their emotions and feelings towards them. This leads to a lot of guilt and frustration and dumb statements like “I’m a nice white guy who hates black people.”

        • -”I don’t know that I agree that treating women like “regular people” is a solution. I think it is the problem. Guys are coached to treat women like men, and hide all of their emotions and feelings towards them”

          I fail to see how these things are connected.

          What exactly is the problem with treating women like people anyway? Does it really equate to what you list?

          And who makes such statements anyway?
          I’ve never seen such a mentality until now.

          I say you ought to give a lot more thought into this subject matter.

  15. “I don’t know that I agree that treating women like “regular people” is a solution. I think it is the problem. Guys are coached to treat women like men,”

    And way to fucking imply that MEN are “normal people”, therefore women are … what?

    You are part of the problem. Wow.

    I am a god damn NORMAL PERSON.

    • I am a god damn NORMAL PERSON.

      Yes I know. I think you think I’m espousing what I’m criticizing.

      And way to fucking imply that MEN are “normal people”, therefore women are … what?

      Well, I’m implying that many men think this way.

      Many many men, including the ones pictured in this blog, think men are normal, but women are emotional, irrational, dumb, vindictive, [insert derogatory sentiment here], etc. and therefore don’t deserve respect. And furthermore, many men think women are born and biologically wired with whatever negative traits they personally assign to women.

      My suggested solution (which would not really be a societal solution, but more a way to change an individual guy’s thinking) was that a lot of these guys need some talking to that this is the wrong way to think, and they need to be taught that behavior such as objectification, harassment, belittling, etc. is wrong.

      As for the nice guys, teaching feminism 101 coupled with some training on how to not think of every interaction with a woman as a potential sexual encounter and simply as getting to know someone else I think would help beat back the tide of this underhanded sexism.

      I think what’s setting off alarm bells among many people here is mere fact that many men think this way and need to be TOLD this explicitly. It’s sad, but it’s true, a lot of men need a good hard talking to about their sexism problem…

      • Oh, dude, I’m sorry. :) I was responding to Edward Gemmer’s asinine comments. HE DOESN’T EVEN MAKE SENSE. Society tells men women needed to be treated like “real people” which actually means society is telling men to treat women like “men” since MEN are “real people” and that is wrong because heaven forbid men treat people like … men or … real people. Or something.

        Basically, men are totally “real people” and women are from Mars. Or is it Venus? IDK.

    • Errr, sorry, you weren’t addressing me. Sorry for the rant.

      My base opinion is: Men need serious talking to on a massive scale to correct their bullshit sexist opinions on women.

      • Could those classes also teach them that women experience the same amount of humiliation and rejection? Because the only women who exist to them are the very attractive ones. The rest are invisible punchlines. Maybe work on that hypocrisy, too?

        • Well, no. Not the “very attractive” — rather, the only women that exist are the ones they find attractive. Or feel entitled to fuck. Which, btw, aren’t always related. Sometimes it’s about the conquest and not about attraction. And everyone finds different things attractive. Many people, for instance, make fat or chubby women into a mere fetish. Etc.

          But in general, I agree with you.

          • True, I should have said ‘very attractive to them’.

      • Definately a subject that ought to be taught in schools.

        It’s a shame that it needs teaching in the first place.

        And I’m willing to be there would be politicians that fight against such teachings.

    • “And way to fucking imply that MEN are “normal people”, therefore women are … what?”

      Isn’t it obvious what he’s implying?

      Women are Abby-normal. ;)

      • I’m trying to reply to everyone but I’m new here and am not quite familiar with how all the reply features work. But to sum up, I’m not insinuating that women are abnormal, but that to these clearly frustrated men, they are a perfect mystery. Why are these men on okcupid at all? Presumably, to find some level of sexual relationship with a woman. Their failure is getting projected on women, which isn’t a new idea. An individual blaming their failures on someone else isn’t novel.

        However, my point is that many men don’t know how to treat women. This whole “treat them like people” sounds nice but isn’t at all helpful to their goal, which is having a relationship. Part of this is that men are taught to “be nice,” as if just being nice is the end all and be all of attracting a mate. When this doesn’t work, frustration sets in, leading to the dumb statements we see.

        • And for women who are having difficulty ‘attracting a mate’? What for them?
          And, these guys aren’t nice. Not at all. If they were actually nice, they might have better luck.
          Why do men need special training? Are they dogs of some kind? I don’t have any more concern for their success or failure than I do for lonely cat ladies. It’s sad, but it’s no excuse to treat people like shit.
          They need to lose their sense of unearned entitlement, is what they need.

          • No doubt, there are men out there right now poking fun at angry, self-righteous women who think men are the root of all evil. But women having trouble with dating often have the same feelings as men, I suppose. I have no experience being a woman so my expertise is limited, there. No doubt, people losing their sense of entitlement is a good thing, but a hopeless goal if there is no sense of what drives it in the first place.

          • And for women who are having difficulty ‘attracting a mate’? What for them?

            Yes they can receive help as well. I’d say that it’s a good thing for anyone who’s lonely and wants to change the situation to get help if they feel it will help.

            The big difference is that women who have trouble don’t tend to generate a tide of overt sexism and rape culture as a result.

            Why do men need special training? Are they dogs of some kind? I don’t have any more concern for their success or failure than I do for lonely cat ladies. It’s sad, but it’s no excuse to treat people like shit.

            For 2 reasons
            1. They have really sexist ideas that need to be expunged.
            2. Once they rid themselves of these ideas, society is bettered, and they are personally able to cure their own problems with loneliness.

            They need to lose their sense of unearned entitlement, is what they need.

            Yeah, well, this happening spontaneously is as likely as spontaneous human combustion. Sometimes when someone has an idea that’s toxic to society and themselves, you need to educate them.

        • //However, my point is that many men don’t know how to treat women. This whole “treat them like people” sounds nice but isn’t at all helpful to their goal, which is having a relationship.//

          How to treat women? No no no. This whole idea of “knowing how to treat women” is the problem.

          When you have the idea that you have to talk to women in a specific way, you characterize them in your mind as fundamentally different and setup your whole interaction based around that. When you’re thinking of a woman as some kind of different creature who needs special “treatment”, the things that come out of your mouth often sound akward and offensive to women. And when you think of them (or any human being) as different, it leads to prejudice. And being sexist doesn’t help your case at all.

          If you just see them as a person you’re trying to get to know and re-fucking-lax a bit, the interaction will go much smoother. These nice guys think of every interaction as some kind of potential dating situation that they’re nervous about screwing up, and so they can’t say anything normal to women. If they’d just calm down a bit and talk to women for the purpose of getting to know them, they’d find themselves not being so lonely.

        • //No doubt, people losing their sense of entitlement is a good thing, but a hopeless goal if there is no sense of what drives it in the first place.//

          Arg no, learning respect is NEVER a hopeless goal. And really think about what you said there, because it’s bad.

          Listen, if you’re just yourself with women, confidently yourself, it allows an attraction to build naturally. Guys are so nervous and can’t develop a regular human interaction. And there’s usually some creepy degree of sexualization that comes with it. If they’d just fucking relax, things would go better.

          Personally my dating life took off in my late 20′s when I just dropped my preconceived notions about women and interacted with them without any fear of “how it would go”. Despite being 50lbs overweight and completely bald by that point, I was able to simply get to know women, make FRIENDS out of them, and gee wiz attraction developed naturally with the right ones without any stupid special treatment or dumb PUA tricks. And it’s in this time I met my loving wife who I now have two children with.

          Seriously, drop sexist ideas, stop thinking of women as any different, stop thikning of every fucking conversation with a woman as a potential sexual encounter, and then you’ll probably no longer appear on the “nice guys” list. :P

        • “However, my point is that many men don’t know how to treat women.”

          What the fuck. I’m a fucking person who happens to have a vagina. TREAT ME LIKE A PERSON.

          Stop thinking of women as some sort of “other”. We’re not a different species! For fuck’s sake.

  16. I don’t necessarily disagree with a lot of what you posted, but it doesn’t go far enough. Being comfortable around people you are attracted to is a wonderful thing, and it takes time and experience to do it well. However, a good dose of self-awareness is critical. Being attracted to someone is a real and tangible thing, and it isn’t “bad.” Attraction often gets confused with sexism, because, well, people are typically attracted to the opposite gender and treat them differently based on that attraction, which is basically sexism (though completely unavoidable).

    • Being comfortable around people you are attracted to is a wonderful thing, and it takes time and experience to do it well. However, a good dose of self-awareness is critical.

      Welllll, just because someone is attractive doesn’t mean you necessarily have to pin then as “someone you want to fuck”. Just get to freaking know them…

      Attraction often gets confused with sexism, because, well, people are typically attracted to the opposite gender and treat them differently based on that attraction, which is basically sexism (though completely unavoidable).

      Looks like you need some education, because attraction =! sexism. That’s a warped view. It’s when men become overbearing, forceful, degrading, or just flat out don’t respect a woman’s right to not be attracted in return that where it crosses the line into sexism.

      But Jesus Christ man, it’s not THAT hard. Just giving women respect (like ALL HUMANS DESERVE), treating women like you would any non-women folk, and accepting NO when you hear without any sexist blowback (‘she only likes assholes’, ‘she doesn’t like me because she’s a bitch’, etc.) from your end it is pretty much all that’s required to not be a nice guy douche. Yeesh.

      I don’t necessarily disagree with a lot of what you posted, but it doesn’t go far enough. Being comfortable around people you are attracted to is a wonderful thing, and it takes time and experience to do it well. However, a good dose of self-awareness is critical.

      Well this needs practice to build up confidence. Which is why I think maybe running workshops for men is a possible solution.

      However, I wouldn’t start any confidence building until men understood and geninuinely internalized feminism 101. Men need a thought revolution in their attitudes towards women because it’s clear year after year that sexism is thick in all world societies.

    • As a bisexual woman, I’m around people all the time, of both sexes, that I find attractive, and somehow, somehow, I am able to treat them as people. And my world isn’t shaken to the core. People you find attractive ARE STILL PEOPLE.

  17. “Looks like you need some education, because attraction =! sexism. That’s a warped view. It’s when men become overbearing, forceful, degrading, or just flat out don’t respect a woman’s right to not be attracted in return that where it crosses the line into sexism.”

    It may be warped, but it is definitely accurate. Sexism can be defined as treating someone differently based on their gender. A man attracted to a woman will most definitely treat her differently based on her gender, as her gender is the key factor that influences the attraction. (Note: obviously, homosexuality exists as well but the arguments works either way). Such treatment is unavoidable, and trying to avoid it is unwise.

    This really can confuse people, as it is almost impossible to justify the position that all sexism is wrong with the proposition that we are pretty much all (with some obvious exceptions) seeking out potential mates of the opposite gender. “Don’t be sexist” is a confusing message to men if the goal is to tell them how to be better people. “Don’t blame women, blame yourself,” is a much better message.

    • Such treatment is unavoidable, and trying to avoid it is unwise.

      WHAT? Are you fucking kidding me? Such treatment should not be accepted. Period. Holy shit. You’re not part of the solution, dude.

    • Sexism can be defined as treating someone differently based on their gender.

      Nope. That’s an example of a false dichotomy.

      That:
      A. If you’re not attracted to someone, you can treat them like a “regular person”
      B. If you’re attracted you can’t

      Clear logical fallacy here.

      A man attracted to a woman will most definitely treat her differently based on her gender, as her gender is the key factor that influences the attraction.

      He will? I find some of my female employees physically attractive, but I treat them like a part of my team like I would anyone else. There are some guys who have treated them differently, and I had to lay the smackdown on them fast. And yes I had to say “don’t be sexist or you’re fired”. He got what that meant quickly.

      Also, when I was dating I didn’t treat women differently, I just talked to my dates :P. I can’t imagine what kind of ridiculous stuff I would’ve said if I thought them different.

      This really can confuse people, as it is almost impossible to justify the position that all sexism is wrong with the proposition that we are pretty much all (with some obvious exceptions) seeking out potential mates of the opposite gender.

      Only if you hold your personally created false dichotomy as true. But it’s false, and yes all sexism is WRONG.

      “Don’t be sexist” is a confusing message to men if the goal is to tell them how to be better people. “Don’t blame women, blame yourself,” is a much better message.

      Awwwww pooor babies. We have to coddle their sexist baby feewings. You want a coowkie?

      lol dude. Fuck that, sexism is fucking sexism, and no you don’t fucking sugar coat it to make men feel better.

  18. Wow. You think she’d be MORALLY OBLIGATED to have sex with you, even if she later realized she wasn’t actually in the mood? So what you’re saying is that you feel someone is MORALLY OBLIGATED to have sex with you even if they don’t want to, that means you are really walking the line of rapist. What if she doesn’t have sex with you? Continues to say no? What would you do? Get angry because she wouldn’t fuck you? THat’s called manipulation and is abuse.

    I lived with someone for 2+ years who felt I was obligated to have sex with him at all times, whenever he wanted, no matter how I felt. And if I didn’t, he wouldn’t (always) force me, but he would make it damn clear that I was doing something WRONG by not allowing him to fuck me even if I didn’t want to.

    It was abuse.

    Plain and simple.

    NO ONE IS EVER MORALLY OBLIGATED TO HAVE SEX WITH YOU FOR ANY REASON.

    If you’re that fucking hard up, get some fucking lube and jack off.

    Your hard on is NOT more important than your partner’s personal feelings and desires.

  19. This really can confuse people, as it is almost impossible to justify the position that all sexism is wrong with the proposition that we are pretty much all (with some obvious exceptions) seeking out potential mates of the opposite gender. “Don’t be sexist” is a confusing message to men if the goal is to tell them how to be better people. “Don’t blame women, blame yourself,” is a much better message.

    WOW. Oh.

    I see.

    A MAN is trying to tell us that some sexism is TOTALLY OKAY!! And treating women like pieces of meat is totally unavoidable and we shouldn’t avoid it anyway! YOU GUYS! I have been saved! HOW DID I NEVER CONSIDER THIS?

    Sexism is motherfucking awesome! All because a MAN told me!

    Yay mansplainers! We women would be so lost without you :D:D:D:D:D::D

    Okay. Enough snark. This evo-psych gibberish isn’t even worth my time.

    • You guys need therapy, not education.
      Attractive people cease to be human, so sexism’s okay?
      Men can’t hold human and attractive in their heads at the same time?
      Aren’t men insulted by this bullshit?
      Do you think attractive men are treated like shit by women?

      For fuck’s sake, sort yourselves out.

      • Men just can’t help themselves around women they find attractive! But *I* am the one dehumanizing this sexist fool! Tooootally.

  20. @ Marilove

    Did he use tactics like yelling at you? Insulting you? Try to make you feel less human? Try to lay guilt trips on you? Because you have used all these tactics in this thread, and this thread is just a nice diversion of time about okcupid pictures. I’m trying to figure out what your point is, other than you don’t agree with me and you feel very strongly about that fact.

    As far as morally obligated, I only say that because if someone told me they were going to have sex with me, then yes I would feel they have a moral obligation to keep their word. That would not give me the right to use force to uphold their word. I’m not sure why this is that big of a deal. It’s not like people go on Judge Judy to enforce their right to have sex.

    @PunchDrunk This whole exercise is trying to explain some guys’ somewhat pathetic behavior.

    • OOOH!! Tone trolling! A sexist asshole is now telling me to be nice to him.

      No.

      Try to make you feel less human?

      AHAHAHAHAH *gasp* AHAHAHAHAHA. Are you serious? Have you read anything you’ve said? You have not one ounce of self-awareness.

      And I fucking quote:

      I don’t know that I agree that treating women like “regular people” is a solution. I think it is the problem. Guys are coached to treat women like men,

      You are the one that keeps saying that women aren’t “real people”. And that the problem is somehow that women want to be treated like “men” (who, in your world, are the “real people”) and that instead men need to treat women like … what? If we women aren’t “real people” (because MEN are the “real people!”), then what does that make women?

      AND THEN you went on to spew some evo-spcyh
      bullshit saying that some sexism must be okay, totally, because it can’t be proven that it’s not (what the fuck does that even MEAN?).

      I am not dehumanizing you in any way. YOU are dehumanizing women.

      I am treating your arguments like the complete and utter wastes of time they are.

      If you don’t like it, the internet is a vast, vast place, and perhaps you can find someone that wishes to entertain your bullshit. I have no desire.

    • As far as morally obligated, I only say that because if someone told me they were going to have sex with me, then yes I would feel they have a moral obligation to keep their word.

      You have yet to explain WHY they have a moral obligation to fuck you even if they don’t want to. Humans have every right to change their mind.

      No one is ever ever ever

      ever
      ever
      ever
      ever
      EVER

      morally obligated to have sex with someone else. Even if they said two seconds before that they wanted it.

      What if a sexual assault survivor thought she was ready, but once the act began she started, she realized she wasn’t?

      Is she somehow still morally obligated to fuck you?

      Or are you just a fucking sexist jerk who thinks you have a right to someone ele’s body even if they say no?

    • @Edward Gemmer:

      You may have noticed that I had a few exchanges with marilove near the start of this thread, then stopped posting. This is because talking to her isn’t productive, as all she’s interested in is flinging insults and generally being rude, rather than advancing the conversation. You’ve made your points, and everyone can read them, but at this point it’s no different than shouting at a wall. I recommend you make better use of your time, unless of course you enjoy talking to people who can’t tolerate disagreement.

      • I liver with a rapist who felt i was morally obligated to fuck him. Edward, are you sure your name is not Eric?

        Because he called me a shitty person, too, when i told him i was too sick to fuck him like he expected too. Since he ALWAYS expected me too. He felt that since i was living with him, i should always be available to him. I had a moral obligation. Unless i wanted to be homeless.

        I guess that makes me a shitty person, since i NEVER felt morally obligated to allow him to rape me, even tho he felt i should always be available to him at his will.

        All because he paid my rent. That was his reasoning

  21. I certainly have not said that women aren’t real people, nor do I feel or agree with anything remotely close to that, so that point can be tossed on the garbage heap. Some of this stuff seems like a gotcha game where someone can try and twist someone else’s words in the hope they can find themselves offended.

    As far as sexism. You can call it evo-psych bullshit, but a better term would be reality. I don’t have a uterus and it is extremely unlikely that I will grow one. I am totally dependent on women to procreate, something which I definitely enjoy doing. I imagine I am not alone. So, it is inevitable that I will treat women differently from men. This may be offensive, but that doesn’t make it any less accurate.

    As far as morally obligated, this just seems like a word game. If you say you are going to do something, you could be considered to have a moral obligation to do it. Sure, you have the right to change your mind. That would definitely compromise your moral of doing what you say. It would probably annoy the prospective partner looking to enjoy a good night with you. So what? I’m not seeing any particularly good arguments against that. Moral obligations don’t translate to rights for anyone to have sex with you. If you don’t have a moral obligation to do what you say, what on earth do you have a moral obligation to do?

    • Proud sexist asshole. A real ‘gender realist’.
      Try A Voice for Men, I think you’d fit right in there.

    • Go away you sexist MRA asshole. You are not welcome here.

      I am not a walking uterus.

      I do not exist soley to make you or anyone babies.

      And YOU STATED that men are real people and women need to stop being treated like men by which you mean real people. THAT IS WHAT YOU SAID.

      Then you stated that some sexism is totally fine. Welcome, even.

      You have yet to back up any of your shit.

      Go away, troll.

      You are way in over your pathetic head.

    • “I am totally dependent on women to procreate, something I definitely enjoy doing.”

      Did you just finish watching Fox News? I mean what the hell is this creepy bullshit? Do you only have sex to procreate ? What do you mean by “enjoy?? You do understand that procreation is not sex but rather a result of sex … right?

      And you do know that not all women can or want to procreate, right? And that women ALSO ENJOY SEX (outside of procreation) and that women are not walking baby making machines … right? And what about gay women?

      Your entire view point is centered around your Dick.

  22. Still think these guys just need a little coaching?
    Poor misunderstood entitled sexist chauvinistic men.

    • Yes I still think teaching anti sexism is in order.

      • You’re more optimistic than I am. People have to want to change, and I think sexism favors men too much for them to want that. Pseudoscientific justifications are more satisfying and allow people to avoid confronting their own bigotry and misogyny. They’d have to give up on their supremacy theories – why would they do that without a cultural revolution?
        I’d love to be wrong, though.

        • Well asking for a mass societal change at the moment is certainly a pipe dream, but changing hearts and minds one by one is always worth it.

          And I know in particular how to do it since I used to be a “nice guy” and I have helped several other guys with degrees of sexism problems see the light.

          Also, I now run a software business which is about 35% female staff, so I need a functional way of stamping it out beyond harassment policies (which I enforce ruthlessly). I’ve had to deal with a few sexism situations among my employees and running a set of workshops actually really helped tone down any latent sexism in the office.

          And it’s kinda sad to have to do that, but you NEED to do that in most workplaces because many men discriminate without even thinking about it.

  23. Oh, and it’s the uterus what done it!
    Them nasty uterati hoggin’ all the sweet sweet childbirth. That’s what makes a woman.

  24. I am totally dependent on women to procreate, something which I definitely enjoy doing. I imagine I am not alone. So, it is inevitable that I will treat women differently from men. This may be offensive, but that doesn’t make it any less accurate.

    YEah okay, so you like the sex. Shitty justification for treating women so much differently.

    Super duper shitty.

    I like teh sex too, and so does everyone else here, but talking to women non-differently isn’t so hard for us. You just have a bad idea of male-female interaction, and hopefully you’ll wise up one day.

    • Notice he said procreation and not sex.

      Fucking creep.

  25. If you don’t know how the idea that someone might be obligated to have sex has a very real role in rape, then you don’t know much about rape.

    I love that Metallogic warned Edward that Marilove doesn’t care about the poor menz fee-fees. I am increasingly convinced that her approach is, if not the only correct approach, at least the most important one.

    For the record, if I’m patiently explaining why it’s not okay to say people could be obligated to have sex, you should just assume that the only reason i’m not giving you a mix of profanity and instructions on how to render yourself infertile with readily available household objects is that you people outnumber us and have power over us.

    I am kind because I can’t afford the social costs that come with not going along to get along.

    • Geez, it’s just a little coercive sex. Why you bitchez gotta be like that?

      Also, did you notice that marilove is saying the same thing as everyone except metalogic and Edward Gemmer?
      But if they focus on one person’s tone, they can ignore their own rapetastic tendencies. They can carry on, secure in their own entitlement.

      • “But if they focus on one person’s tone, they can ignore their own rapetastic tendencies.”

        I don’t have any “rapetastic tendencies”. Perhaps you should read what I’ve written more carefully, especially this: http://skepchick.org/2012/12/skepchick-quickies-12-21-4/?replytocom=161977#comment-161796

        “Also, did you notice that marilove is saying the same thing as everyone except metalogic and Edward Gemmer?”

        No. Marilove said this: “For my safety, I shall from here on out consider you a rapist. Don’t like it? Stop acting like a fucking rapist.” This is borderline libel.

        • Not libel, borderline or otherwise. Just the truth.

          You know what they say about feathered, waddling quackers…

          • I very clearly stated that I would never rape someone. I’m not a rapist, nor will I ever be. Unless someone has evidence that I’m lying (which doesn’t exist, because I’m not), it is in fact borderline libel.

        • Libel?!?’?! Lololol

          IF YOU DO NIT WANT PEOPLE TO THINK YOU MIGHT BE A RAPIST, THEN STOP SAYING RAPE IS OKAY.

          OH dear. I offended a probable rapist!

          • “IF YOU DO NIT WANT PEOPLE TO THINK YOU MIGHT BE A RAPIST, THEN STOP SAYING RAPE IS OKAY.” -marilove

            “Rape is wrong” -me

            Find where I said rape is ok. I dare you, you meanie boogerhead.

        • Possibly libel: “Edward Gemmer is a rapist.”
          Not at all anywhere close to libel: “Edward Gemmer talks like a rapist.”

          See the difference, asshole?

          What the fuck is it with “skeptics” accusing everyone of libel or slander every time they say something they disagree with?? Learn what the fuck you’re talking about.

          • borderline libel: “OH dear. I offended a probable rapist!”

            It’s pretty obvious that the only reason marilove doesn’t outright say “Metalogic is a rapist” is because she’s speculating about my actions (wrongly, I might add), and has no evidence.

            “asshole”

            I’m rubber, you’re glue. Whatever you say bounces off me and sticks to you.

    • “I am increasingly convinced that her approach is, if not the only correct approach, at least the most important one.”

      Depends on the goal. If marilove’s goal is just to turn people off of discussion, sure. But if her goal is to *convince* people that she’s in the right, this is entirely the wrong approach.

      “For the record, if I’m patiently explaining why it’s not okay to say people could be obligated to have sex, you should just assume that the only reason i’m not giving you a mix of profanity and instructions on how to render yourself infertile with readily available household objects is that you people outnumber us and have power over us.” (italics mine)

      Sometimes, we all encounter opinions we find distasteful. The italicized part of this quote is something I find distasteful, just as my opinion that obligation and enforcement of obligation being different is something that many here seem to find distasteful, even to the point of thinking I’m a rapist. But if we flipped our lids every time someone said something we don’t like, we’d be doing nothing but shouting at each other all day, and nothing would get done. Our focus in these types of conversations should be trying to come to some sort of agreement, one way or the other – not insulting each other.

      But if you disagree, I guess I should just say, “fuck you, you fucking piece of shit! Go mutilate yourself, scumbag!”? I don’t communicate in this manner, though, because all it does is piss people off, and makes me feel bad for being rude. It baffles me that people like marilove think it’s ok to be so rude, even if my views are completely off the mark. I wouldn’t even take the marilove route toward a member of the KKK – rather, I’d try to convince him that he’s mistaken.

      • You’re part and parcel of the rape culture, that culture of male entitlement, that makes us unsafe.
        You’re part of the reason 1 in 5 of us can look forward to being raped. (some of us multiple times)
        You’re the reason we can’t feel safe.
        You’re the reason we’re relegated to the sex class.

        You. And the people like you.

        As long as you provide cover and comfort to predators, all I see is stripes.

        • The guy who explicitly stated more than once that he would never rape someone, and that rape is wrong, is the reason that many women feel unsafe, and some of those women will be raped? That doesn’t make any sense. Please stop vilifying me.

          • You stated women are sometimes obligated to have sex with you. YOU condoned rape.

            Who said anything about your actions? We are talking about your words. Which set off huge red flags

            You know, are women are always told to keep ourselves out of danger by avoiding certain areas at certain times and certain people.

            But I bet if i ignored the warning bells that go off when a man staes that women have a moral obligation to fuck him, and then he raped me, you and men like you would say I should have been more careful.

            You are a tape apologist and not welcome here

            GO AWAY.

          • Go away,rape apologist.

      • See, no, you shouldn’t tell me to slam my genitals in a car door because you disagree with me. That’s not why I’m telling you you should do it. It’s not that I disagree with you.

        It’s because what you’re saying is really, really offensive. It’s very unpleasant to engage in this conversation. If you want to know what this feels like emotionally, try slamming your genitals in a car door.

        Rape isn’t what you think it is. Most rape victims know their rapists, most don’t report it. For most of the people that have experienced rape, ideas like the obligation to have sex, the need to address your little fee-fees first before addressing our own, or that we really need to address the possibility that a woman is lying about rape every time the subject comes up are very much the tools that were used to rape us. So yeah, that’s the difference.

  26. //That doesn’t make any sense. Please stop vilifying me.//

    Well you basically said that sometimes women are morally obligated to have sex, when say, they insinuate they’ll do it or promise it.

    That’s rape culture, and you’re upholding it. So once you genuinely realize why that’s bad and stop supporting it, you’ll stop being vilified.

    It’s not that hard to get dude.

    • It can’t be called rape anything, because for the nth time, rape is wrong, and obligation is different from enforcement of obligation.

      Do you think people who sign a contract saying they’ll sell something have an obligation to actually sell it? If so, then by your logic, you are a thief.

      It’s not that hard to get dude.

      • //Do you think people who sign a contract saying they’ll sell something have an obligation to actually sell it? If so, then by your logic, you are a thief.//

        lol, are you serious? You’re thick & definitely a rape culture supporter. Signing a business contract in writing is NOT THE FUCKING SAME.

        A woman doesn’t sign a fucking contract that obligates her to sex when she indicates her desire for it at some point in the night.

        What you don’t get being a priveleged man is that this “obligation” thinking among men leads to millions of women getting pressured into unwanted sex that emotionally scars them. And then it’s blamed on them when the guy says “well you said you wanted it, you were obligated”.

        I’m with Marilove, you’re a rape culture supporter and FUCK YOU.

        • Exactly, this smug, insufferable privilege is the very face of rape culture – yet he thinks it’s just some point scoring academic debate.

          “I’m with Marilove, you’re a rape culture supporter and FUCK YOU.”

          Yes indeed.

        • “A woman doesn’t sign a fucking contract that obligates her to sex when she indicates her desire for it at some point in the night. ”

          I never said she did. Recall my prostitute example. If a prostitute signed a contract for sex, why would it be any different than a contract of sale, or a work contract? Sex isn’t something that’s magically immune to everything. If someone offers sex as a product and then reneges, the same actions should be taken as if that person reneged on a work contract or contract of sale (once again, not rape – legal action, or financial restitution, or something like that).

          And if you disagree, then I’d be interested to hear what one should do if such a case occurs. Ignore the contract? If so, why not ignore all contracts which have been reneged on? What makes sex different than everything else?

          “What you don’t get being a priveleged man is that this “obligation” thinking among men leads to millions of women getting pressured into unwanted sex that emotionally scars them. ”

          That’s irrelevant to whether the point I’m making is true or false. Obligation is not enforcement. If some guy other than me thinks obligation *is* enforcement, well, that’s not my fault, it’s his, and he’s the one who’s wrong. You can’t pin the actions of a rapist on me.

          “I’m with Marilove, you’re a rape culture supporter and FUCK YOU.”

          And you’re a big stupid doo-doo head. Haha, this is fun. Poopyface!

          • It’s true in the same way that it’s true that forcing someone to have sex with you isn’t *always* rape. You can make an argument for a lot of things.

            Like what about consensual nonconsent? What about time travel? People have the right to change their minds later, to revoke or give consent as they please. Is that not exactly what a person is doing when they travel back in time to rape themselves?

            The reason that rape gets treated differently is because we’re not talking about bullshit hypotheticals, we’re talking about real stuff that directly affects us and people we care about. I love time travel arguments as much as the next girl, but you should probably wonder why your response to such a simple statement is to immediately try to poke holes in it.

            Oh, and if you’re enforcing someone’s obligation to have sex with you, you’re doing rape wrong. Do something nice for them. Expect sex back. Guilt them about it. That’s often enough to get them to stop saying “no”. That’s how you rape someone if you don’t want to face consequences for it.

  27. “I love that Metallogic warned Edward that Marilove doesn’t care about the poor menz fee-fees. I am increasingly convinced that her approach is, if not the only correct approach, at least the most important one.”

    IT’s very reminiscent of conservative fundamentalists who when faced with a proposition they disagree with attack other people instead of the position. Disagree with me? You’re a rapist, or a rape supporter, or a heathen who isn’t welcome here because you don’t agree with my ideology about everything. Republicans clearly have no monopoly on the bullshit. It is disappointing.

    “Well you basically said that sometimes women are morally obligated to have sex, when say, they insinuate they’ll do it or promise it.

    That’s rape culture, and you’re upholding it. So once you genuinely realize why that’s bad and stop supporting it, you’ll stop being vilified.”

    This makes no sense at all. Rape is an act of forcing someone to have sex against their will or without their consent. A feeling over whether you think someone should have sex with you isn’t rape, has nothing to with rape, and will never have anything to do with rape. It is simply someone’s feeling. If I get mad at some dumb person who calls me a rape supporter and I want to hit them, it doesn’t make me a violent person unless I actually hit them. Thoughts and acts are two different very different things.

    • You have no idea what rape culture even is, do you?

      Go away.

      • Sure I do, and I definitely believe it is a Real Thing. But being real and everyone being a part of it are two different things, and I don’t appreciate being lumped in with rapists because my views are slightly different than yours.

        • The idea that someone is obliged to have sex whether they like it or not is one of the key components of rape culture. You actually are actively participating.

    • IT’s very reminiscent of conservative fundamentalists who when faced with a proposition they disagree with attack other people instead of the position.

      Except that she and others did attack your fucked up position. You seem to have conveniently forgotten that.

      The position you’ve taken in this thread indicates that you are supportive of rape culture. Period. If you think people are ever obligated to let you have sex with their bodies for any reason, that’s fucked up and is the same thing that rapists think.

      If I told you “you’re welcome to come over to my house” and then I tell you “nevermind” you don’t get to say “nope, you told me I can come to your house!” and walk inside and make yourself at home. I don’t fucking OWE you anything and I am most certainly not OBLIGATED to let you inside my house.

      Same fucking thing with sex. If someone says “I will have sex with you” and then says “nevermind,” you are not somehow magically ENTITLED to use of their body for your own purposes.

      So, it’s not that you’re being “lumped i with rapists because your views are slightly different,” it’s that you’re being lumped in with rapists because your view of being entitled to the use of someone’s body against their will is THE FUCKING DEFINITION OF RAPE.

      • “If you think people are ever obligated to let you have sex with their bodies for any reason, that’s fucked up and is the same thing that rapists think.”

        Many rapists also think that [insert your favorite food here] is delicious. So what? Obligation is not enforcement of obligation. Yes, sometimes rape is the enforcement of obligation (and other times, the obligation isn’t there to begin with), and that enforcement is wrong. But that doesn’t mean the obligation doesn’t exist.

        “If someone says “I will have sex with you” and then says “nevermind,” you are not somehow magically ENTITLED to use of their body for your own purposes.”

        I think everyone here, including Edward Gemmer, agrees with that. I certainly do. No one ever said that every situation in which sex is offered creates an obligation – just some situations. And even if an obligation is created, once again, obligation is not enforcement.

        “it’s that you’re being lumped in with rapists because your view of being entitled to the use of someone’s body against their will is THE FUCKING DEFINITION OF RAPE.”

        No, the definition of rape is nonconsensual sex via physical force or coercion. Rape is an action, not a belief. Thinking you’re entitled to sex isn’t rape, acting on that entitlement without the consent of the other person is.

      • “f I told you “you’re welcome to come over to my house” and then I tell you “nevermind” you don’t get to say “nope, you told me I can come to your house!” and walk inside and make yourself at home. I don’t fucking OWE you anything and I am most certainly not OBLIGATED to let you inside my house.”

        You are right. And me walking into your house would be a crime. On the other hand, you were the one inviting me over and what kind of weirdo invites someone over then changes their mind? I got in my car and drove an hour in the snow and here I am and now you are changing your mind? And you change your mind, and somehow it is my fault for being steamed at you?

        Clearly, you have the right to change your mind about a great many things. But take responsibility for your own actions.

        “So, it’s not that you’re being “lumped i with rapists because your views are slightly different,” it’s that you’re being lumped in with rapists because your view of being entitled to the use of someone’s body against their will is THE FUCKING DEFINITION OF RAPE.”

        That is not my view in any way, shape or form.

        • Seriously, it’s extremely fucked up to think that someone else is obliged to have sex with you. If you can’t help thinking it, well, OK. It’s hard to say “don’t feel that” even if the attitude behind that feeling is fucked up. But if you apply pressure to coerce someone into having sex with you when they don’t want to, because you think they owe you- pouting, guilt trips, telling them they’re morally obligated, etc. that’s not OK. An attempt to coerce someone into having sex is an attempt to rape them. No, the view isn’t rape itself, it is just part of rape culture. Successfully acting on that feeling would be rape. Unsuccessfully acting on that feeling would be a rape attempt.

          • Definitely don’t agree with that. If someone pouts and you have sex with them, you had consensual sex with them. It is not rape and it has nothing to do with rape. It may not be the most kosher behavior, but then again, if you aren’t forced to have sex with them, then it isn’t rape. A better way to root out men being dicks is to not have sex with men who are dicks.

          • If pouting is part of a larger effort to make a person into having sex when they don’t want to, it is psychological coercion. Pouting in and of itself probably isn’t enough to coerce a person into having sex, but if it is part of a larger system of intimidation or bullying, then it most certainly can be coercive.

            You seem to think that the only way to force a person to do something they don’t want to is by physical force. The law does not agree, which is why you cannot intimidate or threaten people into signing contracts. You similarly cannot threaten or intimidate people into having sex with you because that removes the ability to consent. If you say to someone “have sex with me or else I’ll make your life a living hell” and they have sex with you, are you saying that’s consensual sex?

      • Many rapists also think that [insert your favorite food here] is delicious. So what?

        Something being delicious is not a common motivating factor for rape. Feeling that a person OWES you sex and you are therefore entitled to use of that person’s body is. This is a non-sequitur on your part.

        If someone is, in Edward’s words, morally obligated, then why is enforcement of a MORAL OBLIGATION wrong?

        You cannot have it both ways.

        No, the definition of rape is nonconsensual sex via physical force or coercion.

        Actually, if you want to be pedantic, rape does not have to include sex according to the FBI definition–it includes the forcible penetration of a bodily orifice by an object.

        Regardless, my point is that if you feel that people are ever obligated to make their body available to you for sex, that is the kind of thinking that pervades rape culture. And it is the kind of thinking that pervades many different kinds of rape. The type of discussion that someone is obligated is a discussion based in the type of thinking that underlies lots of rape.

        By the way, your distinction between obligation and enforcement is a false distinction. The definition of obligation:

        “to bind or compel (someone), esp. legally or morally”

        The thesaurus entry for “obligate”:

        “Oblige, compel, commit, bind, require, constrain, force, impel”

        Here’s the Wikipedia discussion:

        “An obligation is a course of action that someone is required to take, whether legal or moral. There are also obligations in other normative contexts, such as obligations of etiquette, social obligations, and possibly in terms of politics, where obligations are requirements which must be fulfilled. These are generally legal obligations, which can incur a penalty for non-fulfilment, although certain people are obliged to carry out certain actions for other reasons as well, whether as a tradition or for social reasons.”

        The definition of obligation involves compelling someone to take an action. When you say you would not enforce it, the obligation itself is already an enforcement of a social, legal, or moral norm.

        So when a question asks “is someone ever obligated to have sex with you?”, please do not pretend that that question is asking anything other than “Are there instances where people should be compelled to have sex with you?”. That question has nothing to do with enforcement, it has to do with compelling someone to do something–whether they want to or not.

        You are right. And me walking into your house would be a crime. On the other hand, you were the one inviting me over and what kind of weirdo invites someone over then changes their mind? I got in my car and drove an hour in the snow and here I am and now you are changing your mind? And you change your mind, and somehow it is my fault for being steamed at you?

        Even if you got in your car and drove across the country and you showed up at my door and I said, “nevermind,” you’re still not entitled to come into my house nor am I in any way obligated to let you do so. It’s my fucking house. You are not entitled to access to it if I say you are not welcome inside, no matter what I’ve said in the past or may say in the future.

        Would it be understandable if you were disappointed/annoyed/angry? Sure. But to say I am “morally obligated” to allow use of my home to you is ridiculous. I am under no such obligation. Same thing with sex. Sure, you can feel disappointed/angry/annoyed that you were expecting to have sex, but a person is not obligated to have sex with you. Ever.

        I am allowed to change my mind if I want to. I am under no moral obligation to do anything just because you want me to. You have no legal or moral claims to my property or my body.

        And even if I had let you in, or had started to have sex with you, I am under no obligation to allow you to remain in my home or to finish having sex with you. I can revoke permission or consent at any time and I am under no obligation whatsoever to continue.

        And this is exactly why what you’re saying is a discourse out of rape culture: because where does that obligation end? Even if you were in the middle of sex, the other person has the right to say NO STOP and you have to stop OR IT’S FUCKING RAPE. You don’t get to say “nope, you already told me I could and now you’re obligated!” and keep going.

        Clearly, you have the right to change your mind about a great many things. But take responsibility for your own actions.

        I don’t even know what the fuck this means. If I decide I don’t want to have sex with my partner, what kind of “responsibility” do I need to take? I don’t fucking owe him anything. Not even an apology because this is my body, not his. He does not have the right to access it at any time for whatever reason.

        So, you need to explain exactly what kind of “responsibility” I have to take when I change my mind about having sex.

        That is not my view in any way, shape or form.

        Glad to hear it, though your views of being obligated to have sex with people betrays this statement.

        • “If someone is, in Edward’s words, morally obligated, then why is enforcement of a MORAL OBLIGATION wrong?

          You cannot have it both ways.”

          You most definitely can have it both ways. What I may feel is a moral obligation does not in fact give me right to do whatever I want. If we live together and I give you rent money and you say you are going to pay the rent, I would definitely believe you have a moral obligation to pay the rent. If you instead spend the money on cocaine, I would not have the right to cut out your kidneys and sell them for my rent money.

          Moral obligations are by their very nature unenforceable. Clearly, one can feel someone has a moral obligation to have sex with them. Imagine your wife spends a bunch of money on getting her hair done, buys some new sexy underwear, has the kids go to her parent’s house, and really sets the mood and wants to have a really good night. She probably feels you would have a moral obligation to have sex with her because she has put in so much work and is trying to make the night special for both of you because in theory you love each other. If you blow her off to drink beer and play Halo 4, she would probably be pissed, and by your logic, also a rape supporter. Pish.

          “Would it be understandable if you were disappointed/annoyed/angry? Sure. But to say I am “morally obligated” to allow use of my home to you is ridiculous. I am under no such obligation. Same thing with sex. Sure, you can feel disappointed/angry/annoyed that you were expecting to have sex, but a person is not obligated to have sex with you. Ever.”

          Then there is no moral obligation to ever do anything. If being able to change your mind equates to there being no moral obligation, then we might as well throw the phrase out because anyone can change their mind about anything at any point.

          “So, you need to explain exactly what kind of “responsibility” I have to take when I change my mind about having sex.”

          Pretty simple. Someone may be pissy/mad/pouty name the emotion you like. By your logic, that makes them a rapist. By common sense, that makes them human. The end of your logic is that rapists shouldn’t even feel bad about what they actually do, since they apparently don’t owe anyone anything, certainly not anything like decency or moral action. If the only obligation anyone has is to look out for themselves, then I don’t really see why anyone here is upset with rapists at all. Aren’t they following exactly what you preach?

          • Yes. Someone who really sets the mood and has their hair done and buys some fancy underwear and sends the kids to the sitter and then expects that you’re morally obligated to have sex with her when you don’t want to is participating in rape culture.

            The moral difference between deciding you don’t want to be raped and raping someone should be obvious. One of those is deciding that you have bodily autonomy and the other is deciding that nobody else does. Please don’t hurt anyone.

          • You most definitely can have it both ways. What I may feel is a moral obligation does not in fact give me right to do whatever I want. If we live together and I give you rent money and you say you are going to pay the rent, I would definitely believe you have a moral obligation to pay the rent. If you instead spend the money on cocaine, I would not have the right to cut out your kidneys and sell them for my rent money.

            Thats an argument for something else. If I gave you the money back and said “nevermind, you pay your portion of the rent,” I am not still morally obligated to pay the rent for you. What you’re saying is that once I say that I am going to pay the rent, even if I return the money to you and tell you to pay it yourself, I am still “morally obligated” to pay it because I told you I would in the past. If I agree to pay the rent and change my mind and have returned your money, you might be pissed or annoyed, but that doesn’t mean I am morally obligated to still pay the rent for you.

            If I change my mind and do not return your money, then I am under an obligation to either pay the rent or to return your money.

            So in the scenario with someone agreeing to have sex with you, what is it *exactly* that you have given that person that obligates them to follow through or return the item? It’s not an equivalent analogy.

            Moral obligations are by their very nature unenforceable.

            Might want to tell metalogic that, since he seems to think the exact opposite.

            Clearly, one can feel someone has a moral obligation to have sex with them.

            People can feel whatever they want. That doesn’t mean there’s an actual obligation. I feel you are morally obligated to shut the fuck up and leave this website and never return. That doesn’t mean that you are actually under any obligation to do so because I feel that way. It’s not my website and I don’t have the right to make that decision.

            Here’s the ultimate problem with your reasoning: I am under no prior obligation to allow you access to my property or my body. If I grant you access, that does not obligate me to continue granting you access. The only possible way you could be obligated to continue having access would be if you had ownership or possession rights, which you don’t.

            The rest of what you said makes no sense. It’s all a straw argument. And you did not answer my question as to what responsibility I should be taking by revoking permission to my home/body. You just went on some rant about moral relativism. I told you to explicitly and exactly tell me what responsibility needs to be taken when revoking consent. And unless you do that, I’m done talking to you.

  28. @ Will

    I don’t quite understand why I can hit reply to some statements and not to others. In any event, yes, intimidation or threats is certainly a method of force. Force, threat of force, or acts perpetrated on someone unable to consent (which I consider to be unconscious or close to it) all fit as violent acts under the law.

    “Have sex with me or I’ll make your life a living hell” is probably physically threatening. It isn’t explicitly a physical threat, though I can’t think of any circumstances where it is good behavior.

  29. “So in the scenario with someone agreeing to have sex with you, what is it *exactly* that you have given that person that obligates them to follow through or return the item? It’s not an equivalent analogy.”

    Don’t see that it matters. If I give someone money for sex, I may feel they have a moral obligation to it as well, and it would certainly satisfy the consideration portion of the moral obligation. But it would still be rape if I tried to enforce it using physical force.

    “People can feel whatever they want. That doesn’t mean there’s an actual obligation.”

    BINGO. End if this conversation. You may feel one way and someone else may feel a different way. That is life. Two people having different feelings does not make one of them a rapist.

    ” And you did not answer my question as to what responsibility I should be taking by revoking permission to my home/body. You just went on some rant about moral relativism. I told you to explicitly and exactly tell me what responsibility needs to be taken when revoking consent. And unless you do that, I’m done talking to you.”

    I did. I’m not sure what else you want me to say. If you make other people feel like crap, it is your fault. You are not the victim. That doesn’t give them the right to rape you. It just makes you a shitty person who doesn’t care about the feelings of others. If you try and blame them for your own actions, you are not taking responsibility for your actions. Is their a simpler way to say that? I don’t know.

    • I did. I’m not sure what else you want me to say. If you make other people feel like crap, it is your fault. You are not the victim. That doesn’t give them the right to rape you. It just makes you a shitty person who doesn’t care about the feelings of others. If you try and blame them for your own actions, you are not taking responsibility for your actions. Is their a simpler way to say that? I don’t know.

      You hear that rape survivors? If you’ve ever changed your mind about sex in a night, you’re a shitty person who doesn’t care about the feelings of others and you’re not taking responsibility for your actions.

      With statements like this ladies, we know this guy is totally an ally and totally doesn’t support rape culture. And it seems he TOTALLY knows what it’s like being a woman being pressured into sex.

      Again Edward, you definitely ARE a rape culture enabler. Plain and fucking simple by your own words.

      • “You hear that rape survivors? If you’ve ever changed your mind about sex in a night, you’re a shitty person who doesn’t care about the feelings of others and you’re not taking responsibility for your actions.”

        You hear that rape survivors? Dr. Dr. Professor just compared changing your mind about sex to being raped. Doesn’t exactly say much for the whole empathy thing.

        Look, people generally have the right to do many, many things. Women especially have every right to be sexual without having sex, if they choose not to, which is what a lot of these arguments comes to. But that being said, men, especially stupid or young men, can have a lot of different things in their mind: they want to have sex, they don’t want to be emasculated for not having sex, they think they are supposed to have sex or else the woman will think less of them, and perhaps they are just shitty people. When they surrounded by other men, they become a lot shittier.

        We know these things; people on this website rail against these things, but pointing them out is akin to supporting rapists? This attitude encourages sexual assault. You can’t on one hand rail against “frat boy douches” for rape then claim that it is blaming the victim to suggest that avoiding frat houses is a good idea to avoid rape.

    • I’m going to repeat this paragraph of Will’s. Let’s see if you can answer this!

      And you did not answer my question as to what responsibility I should be taking by revoking permission to my home/body. You just went on some rant about moral relativism. I told you to explicitly and exactly tell me what responsibility needs to be taken when revoking consent. And unless you do that, I’m done talking to you.

      I am no longer responding to you unless you can respond to these questions. GET TO IT. You’re morally obligated! :D

  30. “Yes. Someone who really sets the mood and has their hair done and buys some fancy underwear and sends the kids to the sitter and then expects that you’re morally obligated to have sex with her when you don’t want to is participating in rape culture.

    The moral difference between deciding you don’t want to be raped and raping someone should be obvious. One of those is deciding that you have bodily autonomy and the other is deciding that nobody else does. Please don’t hurt anyone.”

    It’s tough for me to see how the woman in the example is promoting rape, but different strokes for different folks, I guess.

    I’ll try not to hurt anyone. As someone who works in the criminal justice system, the victimology of all crimes has been difficult to overcome. Crime is not a zero sum game. There are often ways (NOT ALWAYS) for people to avoid becoming victims of crime. Thinking about these things in a rational manner does not equate to blaming the victim.

    • Um, nimravid was being sarcastic. Maybe you should lurk moar!

      • - even if I’m wrong about the sarcasm.

        I will tell you this bit, the threading system here sucks monkey dicks, and with extreme inner nesting the number of replies is limited I think to 5.

  31. “. There are often ways (NOT ALWAYS) for people to avoid becoming victims of crime.”

    Oh, wow.

    I see.

    Yay victim blaming! You just HAD to toss that in there, didn’t you?

    I guess the way to “avoid becoming a victim” is allowing yourself to be raped?

    • He’s not blaming anyone. His statement is factual – there *are* often ways for people to avoid becoming victims of crimes. This isn’t arguable. Advice on how to avoid becoming a victim doesn’t mean one is to blame for not following the advice.

      In fact, railing against advice on how to avoid becoming a victim just creates more victims. One would think that people would welcome such advice – cause who wants to be the victim of a crime?

      Here’s some sample advice: if you don’t want your house broken into, investing in a security system will lower the chances. Are you to blame if your house is broken into? No, regardless of whether you heed this advice. But the advice is still valuable; the more people who heed it, the less break-ins there will be, and thus fewer victims.

      • In fact, railing against advice on how to avoid becoming a victim just creates more victims.

        In fact? I see! A fact! Care to provide your sources to back that fact up? And remember to make sure your sources provide information regarding rape victims, since that is what we’re talking about. In short, [citation fucking needed].

        And are you REALLY comparing someone’s body to a fucking house? Are you REALLY comparing property theft to RAPE?

        Fucking christ.

        You DO REALIZE that the majority of rapists already know the victim, right? Shall women and children be locked up so as to avoid being raped by their boyfriends? friends? fathers? uncles?

        STOP comparing property theft to rape. I am not a fucking house.

        • “In fact? I see! A fact! Care to provide your sources to back that fact up?”

          It’s common sense, boogerface. If effective advice is offered, then a percentage of those who hear it will follow it, and a percentage of those will avoid becoming a victim.

          “And are you REALLY comparing someone’s body to a fucking house? Are you REALLY comparing property theft to RAPE?”

          No. I was comparing one piece of advice to another.

          “Shall women and children be locked up so as to avoid being raped by their boyfriends? friends? fathers? uncles?”

          No, that’s ridiculous. This is a perfect example of bad advice. Good advice would be educating everyone about the behavioral warning signs that a rape might occur in the future, and get people protection if their interactions with these people are heading down that road. We should be trying to stop rapes before they happen, not letting them happen and then complain about them happening all the time. I don’t care if you think I’m “victim blaming” – if it prevents rapes, that’s what matters.

          “STOP comparing property theft to rape. I am not a fucking house.”

          No, you’re more like a broken record.

          (also responding to your post under this one)

          ” Telling women to “be careful” does nothing to stop rape.”

          I agree. That’s another example of bad advice. That doesn’t mean all advice is bad.

          “How about men stop raping? HOW ABOUT THAT?”

          Good idea – except, if someone is of such low moral character that they would rape someone, then telling them not to isn’t going to change anything. That’s like saying “hey murderers, stop murdering!” Ineffective. Once again, preventing rapes is more important than arguing about finger-pointing.

          “That is advocating rape.”

          No it’s not.

          “That is rape culture.”

          Remember a few days ago when I said “rape is wrong”? Just wanted to remind you of that.

          EVER.

          EVER

          EVER

          EVER

          Spam, spam, spam, spam, eggs, and spam!

          • It is NOT common sense. It is bullshit. You are spewing bullshit.

            YOU made the claim. It is up to YOU to provide proof.

            YOU stated that women have a MORAL OBLIGATION to fuck you. You think rape is ok.. You keep contradicting yourself. Just like that republican that forced his wife to have two abortions but in the same breath said abortions are wrong.

            You are advocating rape.

            I am not property and I am NEVER morally obligated to have sec.

            And I fuckbg nailed it earlier – you feel women are obligated to fuck you, but also obligated to keep themselves safe from rape. So, basically, we are always at fault in your world.

      • Seriously, though, we have to go through this shit AGAIN? Telling women to “be careful” does nothing to stop rape.

        How about men stop raping? HOW ABOUT THAT?

        And how about we stop promoting rape culture by saying things like, “Sometimes women are morally obligated to have sex with me.

        That is advocating rape.

        That is rape culture.

        NO ONE IS EVER OBLIGATED TO HAVE SEX WITH YOU FOR ANY FUCKING REASON. EVER.

        EVER

        EVER

        EVER

  32. http://www.notever.co.uk/have-your-say/campaign-reaction/comparing-rape-to-property-theft/

    “Comparing the unwanted abuse of a woman’s body to property theft shows us just how deeply ingrained the notion of women’s bodies ad property is”…

    …”You cannot compare a woman just existing and going about her daily life with ‘keeping valuables in plain sight’. Genitals are not valuables…”

    I am not a house or a car or a wallet or some other THING. I AM A HUMAN BEING.

    http://www.patheos.com/blogs/lovejoyfeminism/2012/09/its-just-common-sense-versus-victim-blaming.html

    • From the second link:

      “If he had said “carrying a can of mace with you can be handy if you find yourself assaulted” or “it’s a good idea to have a friend call and check up on you the morning after a first date, just to make sure you’re okay” then yes, it would be parallel to the rest and I wouldn’t have a problem with it.”

      This is the kind of good advice I’m advocating.

      “I am not a house or a car or a wallet or some other THING. I AM A HUMAN BEING.”

      No one here denied your personal agency. You’re shouting at nothing.

      • You denied women agency as soon as you said women have a MORAL OBLIGATION to fuck you.

        And I am done arguing with a rape apologist. Fuck off.

        • “You denied women agency as soon as you said women have a MORAL OBLIGATION to fuck you.”

          If having a moral obligation means denying agency, then no one has agency, because everyone has various moral obligations. By your own reasoning, rape is no different than sex with an inanimate object.

          I, on the other hand, recognize the agency of women when I say “obligation is not enforcement” – having agency means they can choose whether or not to fulfill their obligations.

          “And I am done arguing with a rape apologist.”

          Since I’m not a rape apologist (“rape is wrong”, remember? I don’t know why you persist in ignoring half of what I say, even when I say it several times), you never started.

          “Fuck off.”

          You have a nice day too.

          • No one is ever morally obligated to fuck you.

            Period.

            Fuck off.

            Go away.

            Go troll somewhere else.

            And, hey, if you think that I’m obligated to keep myself from becoming a victim, then just think of my not wanting to interact with rape apologists as keeping myself from becoming a victim. Got it?

            Because I would NEVER interact with someone in meat space who felt the way you did.

            Well, I lie: I did that for two years.

            And for two years, I was raped.

            Becuase my ex felt I was MORALLY OBLIGATED to fuck him if he continued to pay rent. If I didn’t fuck him as I was morally obligated, then I was out on the streets.

            And so, now, I have decided that any person, male or female, that feels I am ever MORALLY OBLIGATED to have sex with them, is no friend of mine. I am not friends or lovers with rape apologists. I was raped by one for two years.

      • And if you state something as FACT but cannot prove your FACT? Then I can tell you straight up that youre wrong.

        I will not respond until you show proof of your ignorant claims.

        The onus of proof is on YOU.

        • ” If effective advice is offered, then a percentage of those who hear it will follow it, and a percentage of those will avoid becoming a victim. ”

          Do you agree with this? Why or why not?

  33. “You have a nice day too.”

    I never told you to have a nice day. I hope you have a rotten day, rape apologist.

    • I was being facetious.

      • Teehee, rape is so funny! Such a light-hearted topic!

        I wasn’t being facetious.

        Unlike you, rape isn’t a fucking joke for me.

        Have a rotten fucking day, asshole.

        • No, rape isn’t funny. But luckily for me, I wasn’t joking about that. I was joking about your immature attitude. You can play with the big kids on your own, I’ll stick with the adults.

        • “immature attitude”

          Oh, yes. I’m supposed to respect rape apologists! I’m supposed to respect those who claim I’m morally obligated to fuck them!

          Except *no*.

          Stop with the tone trolling.

          Are you going to call me hysterical, next?

          Fuck off, asshole.

          • I’m not tone trolling. If you want to act immature, go ahead and act immature.

          • I’d rather be “immature” than a rape apologist any fucking day of the week.

  34. And why is it that “Skeptics” suddenly forget they are speticks whenever rape is brought up?

    If you state something as fact, then you better be able to back that shit up. If not, go the fuck away and come back when you can play with the big kids.

  35. And is someone going to respond to Will’s question?!

    I don’t even know what the fuck this means. If I decide I don’t want to have sex with my partner, what kind of “responsibility” do I need to take? I don’t fucking owe him anything. Not even an apology because this is my body, not his. He does not have the right to access it at any time for whatever reason.

    So, you need to explain exactly what kind of “responsibility” I have to take when I change my mind about having sex.

  36. You know, it wasn’t that long ago ( until the fucking 90′s) when spousal rape wasn’t even illegal in most states, because people believed (and many still do) that wives have a MORAL OBLIGATION to have sex with their husbands, regardless of how they (the wife) feels.

    I was with a man who felt, because I was dating him, and he was paying rent, that I was morally obligated to fuck him.

    And if I didn’t, then I was a shitty person and a shitty girlfriend.

    That is called COERSION. That is called MANIPULATION.

    And it is rape.

    • “I was with a man who felt, because I was dating him, and he was paying rent, that I was morally obligated to fuck him.

      And if I didn’t, then I was a shitty person and a shitty girlfriend.

      That is called COERSION. That is called MANIPULATION.

      And it is rape.”

      The bold is mine, and highlights the difference between him and me. Try to figure it out.

      • So, what DOES it make me if I break my moral obligation? Hmmm? Because you can’t break a moral obligation without some sort of consequence, mental or otherwise.

        I spent two years being manipulated by someone who felt I was morally obligated to have sex with him. It made me FEEL like a shitty person whenever he made me feel that I broke that moral obligation.

        You do realize that that is one consequence to moral obligation, right?

        Or are you just going to continue to ignore my relevent fucking experience? Clearly it makes you uncomfortable, but STOP IGNORING IT.

    • “He thinks that using money or emotional blackmail to coerce sex isn’t a bad thing. Plainly.

      He’s also obviously really used to convincing himself that he’s right”

      Not at all. What he thinks, and what many people think, is that not all bad things equal rape. To some people, rape is an awful, awful act, worthy of the utmost contempt and incarceration. Not every sexual act that can be construed negatively equals rape. That doesn’t mean negative acts involving sex are ok or praiseworthy or approved of. But not all acts of sexual violence are equal, and not all acts of sex are sexually violent.

      • We’re talking about contributing to rape culture.

      • So you DO admit that thinking that women are obligated to fuck you is SEXUAL VIOLENCE? Is that what you’re saying here? Because I think that’s what you’re saying here.

        Actually, I know that’s not what you’re saying. I also know that’s not what the other person is saying.

        Are you drunk? Because this comment makes not one lick of fucking sense.

      • Although, maybe you DID just admit that “obligation to have sex” – coercion? Because that’s what it SEEMS you’re saying.

        If that’s the case, where the FUCK did anyone say all sexual violence was “equal”? And for the record all sexual violence is JUST AS BAD and unacceptable. Just because you feel coercing (WHICH IS RAPE) someone to have sex by saying they are obligated to have sex with you isn’t “as bad” doesn’t make it any less of a RAPE.

  37. You keep responding to marilove, but haven’t addressed:

    You hear that rape survivors? If you’ve ever changed your mind about sex in a night, you’re a shitty person who doesn’t care about the feelings of others and you’re not taking responsibility for your actions.

    With statements like this ladies, we know this guy is totally an ally and totally doesn’t support rape culture. And it seems he TOTALLY knows what it’s like being a woman being pressured into sex.

    Again Edward, you definitely ARE a rape culture enabler. Plain and fucking simple by your own words.

    Or:
    It’s all a straw argument. And you did not answer my question as to what responsibility I should be taking by revoking permission to my home/body. You just went on some rant about moral relativism. I told you to explicitly and exactly tell me what responsibility needs to be taken when revoking consent. And unless you do that, I’m done talking to you.

    Or:
    If you don’t know how the idea that someone might be obligated to have sex has a very real role in rape, then you don’t know much about rape.

    For the record, if I’m patiently explaining why it’s not okay to say people could be obligated to have sex, you should just assume that the only reason i’m not giving you a mix of profanity and instructions on how to render yourself infertile with readily available household objects is that you people outnumber us and have power over us.

    Or:
    In metalogic’s smug, insulated view of the world there is no rape culture.

    He just came up against it in the shape of you yourself.

    But after all, you are only a figment of the internet, not a flesh and blood human being.

    How long will he continue in denial?

    What’s up with that?

    You’re contributing to a toxic culture of entitlement and rape. Your ideas and opinions are wrong and actively harmful. It’s been explained every which way.

    Feel free to stop justifying your fucked up worldview any time. You’re only reassuring yourself.

    • Maybe it has to hit close to home before you realise – and then once your eyes are opened, it’s everywhere. Not that I would wish that on anybody.

    • Some of those weren’t addressed to me, but I’ll comment on everything there now.

      “You hear that rape survivors?…”

      I’ve mentioned previously that not all offers of sex create an obligation. Yes, usually it’s ok to change one’s mind. But going back to the original okcupid question, it reads, “Are there any circumstances…” Maybe all this disagreement is just because we view sex in general differently – in my prostitute example, I don’t see a sex contract as any different than a contract for something else. If we flip it around, I’d also say that the client has an obligation to pay the prostitute. It has nothing to do with “omg the client was promised sex and didn’t get it”; it’s just that contracts should be upheld, regardless of whether they involve sex, or sale of goods, or work. But once again, rape is not the proper solution to a broken sex contract, and anyone who does rape is in the wrong.

      Also, as I implied in my latest post to marilove, I don’t think that breaking an obligation for sex makes you a shitty person.

      “It’s all a straw argument…”

      This was a response to something Edward Gemmer said, and doesn’t seem at all relevant to anything I’ve said. I don’t know what to say to this, other than point out that people can consent to things other than sex, such as filing papers for 8 hours in exchange for pay. Again, the issue of what the proper response is comes up – if you fail to do your job, you’ve broken an obligation, but this doesn’t mean your boss can force you to keep filing. He can, however, dock your pay or even fire you. Once again, the prostitute example.

      “If you don’t know how the idea…”

      I realize that some rapists think that the women they rape are obligated to have sex with them. But when they use this idea to justify their rape, they’re at odds with me. I don’t think the obligation justifies the rape at all. But it still exists (sometimes).

      Here’s an analogy. Let’s say an economist does some research and determines that “Obamacare” is going to hurt the economy. Another person reads a news article about this, then decides that since Obamacare is going to hurt the economy, he’s justified in assassinating the president. Does this put the economist at fault? No.

      “In metalogic’s smug, insulated view…”

      I still don’t see how I can be contributing to any kind of rape culture, given that I’ve said several times that rape is wrong. If you think I’m contributing to it because rapists say some of the same things as me, see above.

      I’m assuming that the “figment of the internet” line is a reference to my comment here (http://skepchick.org/2012/12/skepchick-quickies-12-7-4/#comment-161272). If so, that’s a misinterpretation. I didn’t mean that people commenting on the internet don’t matter – if I did, that would mean I don’t matter either. What I meant was that the problems talked about in these circles don’t seem to be as large a problem as the comments on the internet make them out to be.

      “You’re contributing to a toxic culture of entitlement and rape. Your ideas and opinions are wrong and actively harmful. It’s been explained every which way.”

      I’m really not sure how you and the others who are on your “side” want me to say here. Am I supposed to change my mind, and say that obligation IS enforcement? Is there supposed to be a problem with being obligated to have sex, even if enforcing that obligation isn’t ok? I don’t see how there mere obligation without the enforcement of it could cause any harm. Isn’t it clear that the enforcement (rape), which I don’t condone, is the harmful part? So why so much distaste over the obligation part?

      • Yes, usually it’s ok to change one’s mind.

        No. IT IS ALWAYS OKAY TO CHANGE YOUR MIND.

        Maybe all this disagreement is just because we view sex in general differently – in my prostitute example, I don’t see a sex contract as any different than a contract for something else.

        Oh. “Me, me, me! I, I, I!”

        Guess what, buddy: it is NOT UP TO YOU how *other people* feel about sex or their own bodies. Period. End of discussion. How YOU feel about it is not fucking relevant. At ALL.

        Period.

        I realize that some rapists think that the women they rape are obligated to have sex with them. But when they use this idea to justify their rape, they’re at odds with me. I don’t think the obligation justifies the rape at all. But it still exists (sometimes).

        You are using circular fucking logic. “I understand some people use obligation as a means to rape but even though I feel obligation exists I don’t but I understand some men do!”

        Holy fucking circular bullshit.

        Also, as I implied in my latest post to marilove, I don’t think that breaking an obligation for sex makes you a shitty person.

        Do you know what OBLIGATION means? If I don’t do what is apparently my MORAL OBLIGATION, then what doe sthat make me?

        YOU DO know what “obligation” means, right? It means duty. So what DOES it make me if I don’t do my MORAL OBLIGATION?

        You keep using the words “moral obligation” but I don’t think you even fucking know what they mean.

        So, if I don’t do my responsibility (aka moral obligation), then what does that make me, hmm? Because you can’t break a moral obligation without some sort of consequence. IT WOULD NOT BE A MORAL OBLIGATION OTHERWISE.

        Here’s an analogy. Let’s say an economist does some research and determines that “Obamacare” is going to hurt the economy. Another person reads a news article about this, then decides that since Obamacare is going to hurt the economy, he’s justified in assassinating the president.

        STOP with the shitty analogies! Stop comparing women to objects. Stop comparing women to the economy. WOMEN ARE PEOPLE!

        Just because you say, “I think rape is wrong” DOES NOT mean you are not promoting rape culture. Just becaus you say something doesn’t make it true. Women are NEVER obligated to fuck you. Ever. For any fucking reason. Women are not property.

        What I meant was that the problems talked about in these circles don’t seem to be as large a problem as the comments on the internet make them out to be.

        WOW
        WOW
        WOW.

        I mentioned, oh, at least three times about my real-world experience with obligation-rape. Kind of interesting (not) that you’ve ignored my very real-world experience EVERY TIME I’ve brought it up. Just completely ignored it. You haven’t aknowledged my REAL WORLD example even *once*: The fact that a man I dated felt I was OBLIGATED to have sex with him and then used that “obligation” to rape me. Over and over again.

        But apparently, because I’m on the internet, it’s just not that big of a deal. Apparently I’m making MY rape out to be a bigger deal than it is, hmm?

        Fuck

        YOU.

        • He thinks that using money or emotional blackmail to coerce sex isn’t a bad thing. Plainly.

          He’s also obviously really used to convincing himself that he’s right.

          • Looks like I have to repeat myself yet again:

            “But when they use this idea to justify their rape, they’re at odds with me. I don’t think the obligation justifies the rape at all.”

          • You are utilizing circular logic.

      • I don’t see how there mere obligation without the enforcement of it could cause any harm.

        What, the fact that “mere obligation” caused ME harm doesn’t fucking matter?

        Every time my ex told me I was OBLIGATED to have sex with him, it made me feel less like a person. I had no agency. I was OBLIGATED to fuck him, and if I didn’t, that certainly meant I was doing something WRONG. Every time he reassured me that I was obligated to fuck him even if I didn’t want to, IT HARMED ME. It was HIGHLY manipulative and it caused a great deal of trauma that I’m still trying to get over.

        Does it even fucking matter to you that “mere obligation” HARMED ME?

        Because clearly, you don’t give a fuck about me or my real world experiences. You care more about your stupid analogies. You care more about comparing me to property theft and “obamacare”.

        • “What, the fact that “mere obligation” caused ME harm doesn’t fucking matter?”

          Mere obligation didn’t cause you any harm. A false obligation + enforcement (in the form of coercion) did, by your own admission: “I was with a man who felt, because I was dating him, and he was paying rent, that I was morally obligated to fuck him.

          And if I didn’t, then I was a shitty person and a shitty girlfriend.”

          I’m not talking to you anymore.

          • PS: Insisting that someone is morally obligated to fuck you IS COERCSION. It’s manipulation via emotions. Plain and fucking simple. I know becuase I went through it for TWO YEARS.

            You DO NOT have a right to tell me if I was harmed or not. You are a piece of fucking shit.

  38. Bah, blockquote fail:

    I realize that some rapists think that the women they rape are obligated to have sex with them. But when they use this idea to justify their rape, they’re at odds with me. I don’t think the obligation justifies the rape at all. But it still exists (sometimes).

    You are using circular fucking logic. “I understand some people use obligation as a means to rape but even though I feel obligation exists I don’t but I understand some men do!”

    Holy fucking circular bullshit.

  39. NOW you are trying to deny my experiences and feelings.

    The fact that he felt I was obligated to fuck him DID HARM ME. Because if I said no, then I knew he felt I was breaking some sort of obligation, which then made me feel really crappy, like I was doing something wrong. Which is what he WANTED.

    The fact that you are telling me that I was NOT harmed, even though I AM SAYING I WAS, is fucked up, man.

    Stop erasing my experiences.

    You are a disgusting human being.

  40. Anyway, I’m done. I am done arguing with someone who tries to tell ME how MY rape effected me.

    Fuck

    OFF.

  41. I’ve been in the position of having sex with someone who changed their mind during the act.
    Know what I did?
    I withdrew, stayed close and gave them whatever they needed. I didn’t think they owed me, nor was I angry or pissed (my biology was a little thrown, but you’d expect that with that many hormones flooding you!)

    Even so, it was easy.

    Because I loved them, and because they were a rape survivor, and that’s what you do if you’re a halfway ok human being (They’re still a great friend, with a partner who’s a wonderful person).

    The idea that someone is obligated to have sex with you is wrong. I don’t even know why I have to type that.

  42. It appears Edward just had a daughter.

    So – and I am just going to use hypotheticals as a tool, just like you! – if your daughter, when she is of age, is having sex with her boyfriend but then asked him to stop in the middle of the act – would you feel she did something wrong? That she broke her MORAL OBLIGATION because she changed her mind? Whet would you tell your daughter if she came to you and said he didn’t stop? Oh well? Once you’ve consented, that’s it, and now you’re MORALLY OBLIGATED to continue to have sex against your wishes?

    Why doesn’t her boyfriend have a moral fucking obligation to consider her feelings about the matter?

    Why does she have the moral obligation but he does not?

    Would you be ok with your daughter being raped? Would you be able to look at her in the eye and tell her that his dick is more important than her needs or wants? That once she says yes, changing her mind means she broke her moral obligation?

    What you’re saying is that we cannot revoke consent without moral consequence.

    And that is what gets me. You cant break a moral obligation without consequence. Otherwise it wouldn’t be a moral obligation.

  43. Awesome, conversations about my infant daughter’s sex life.

    Anyway, when I was in high school I took a 10 week karate class to fill a credit. The teacher of the class would teach a move and then explain when this move might be necessary. Raising your hands above your head in an “x” pattern works well when someone is trying to hit you on top of your head. Not so much if they are trying to kick you in the knee. He said one person asked him what to do if you get tied up and locked in a closet. The teacher said at that point, it’s too late, and the class was about avoiding that point.

    So to my daughters, my thoughts would be that by the time you are in an abusive relationship for years with no options except homelessness, then clearly things went wrong right from the start. My daughters will (hopefully) be aware of what men can be about, what to watch for, what situations to put themselves in, and what to do if things go wrong. She has no obligations to anybody except for the ones she creates for herself, so be careful and thoughtful about what she says and does.

  44. That was a super creepy, victim-blaming response.

    “She has no obligations to anybody except for the ones she creates for herself, so be careful and thoughtful about what she says and does.”

    Wow.

    And who said anything about an abusive relationship? Or are you finally admitting that someone who ignores your desire to STOP having sex is abusing you? And that one does NOT have a moral obligation to continue?

    • LOL, so being thoughtful and responsible is “super creepy”?

      • You have stated that she must be “thoughtful” when giving consent, because if she revokes consent for any reason, she is breaking a moral obligation. So IN THIS CONTEXT (dude, context MATTERS), yes, it is fucking creepy. You clearly don’t feel she has any agency or choice in the matter.

        YOU DO know what the words “moral” and “obligation” mean, right? RIGHT?

  45. And you never fucking answered my question:

    If she said no in the middle of having sex, would she be breaking her MORAL OBLIGATION, aka would she be doing something MORALLY WRONG? Would she? Answer me.

  46. “Awesome, conversations about my infant daughter’s sex life. ”

    And I just LOVE this bit of hypocrisy! It’s perfectly okay to talk about women as abstract hypotheticals, or completely and utterly ignore MY experiences. But I mention your daughter and OH DEAR! Can’t touch that! I mean, every other woman? Psh. Their feelings don’t matter, but man. Talking about your daughter is *crossing a line*!

    Your daughter has a rape apologist as a father. That worries me.

  47. And that is what gets me. You cant break a moral obligation without consequence. Otherwise it wouldn’t be a moral obligation.

    Saying that you’re breaking a MORAL OBLIGATION by revoking consent once you’ve given consent implies that you are doing something MORALLY WRONG — you can’t break a moral obligation without consequence. You just can’t. Otherwise, it wouldn’t BE a moral obligation. So, yes, there is harm — mental and emotional harm. Which is what I went through for 2+ years. And no amount of, “You weren’t harmed! I promise! I know more about your experiences than you do!” will change the fact that I was, indeed, harmed.

  48. So what are the consequences?

  49. So what are the consequences?

    Dude, are you fucking serious? YOU are the one saying there is a moral obligation, which implies a consequence. So what is the consequence? I ASKED YOU.

    But I already did answer, if you would read what I wrote: They are emotional and psychological. I know this from EXPERIENCE.

    A moral obligation implies that you are doing SOMETHING WRONG if you go back on your “word” but there is nothing wrong with revoking consent for ANY REASON AT ANY TIME.

    There *shouldn’t* be a “moral obligation” but many men put that moral obligation on women. Just like you are doing. Just like you are doing TO YOUR OWN DAUGHTER.

    Your words indicate that your daughter, once she has given consent, has a moral obligation to NOT revoke that consent, no matter her actual feelings on the matter.

    You said it, not I. You are putting that “moral obligation” ON YOUR DAUGHTER. Your daughter will be a woman someday, you know. And you are talking about women.

    Perhaps, just perhaps, if you look at it from your daughter’s eyes, you will realize how fucked up your feelings on sex and rape are.

  50. What are the consequences for breaking any moral obligation?

  51. Emotional and psychological. HOW MANY TIMES CAN I STATE THIS?

    THIS IS WHY THERE SHOULD NEVER BE A MORAL OBLIGATION PLACED ON CONSENT.

    No one should EVER be punished, emotionally, psychologically, or physically, for denying consent, for any reason.

    Are you really this fucking dense? YOU DO know what the words “moral” and “obligation” mean, don’t you?!

  52. I’m not sure why every question has to be met with a barrage of cussing and insults, but whatever. I don’t agree at all. If some women unilaterally decided she no longer wished to have sex with her husband, solely because she would rather watch television or have sex with other people or some other reason, I would not blame him for being upset about the situation, nor would I call him a rapist or rape apologist or rape culture apologist or whatever it is that I supposedly am here. Similarly, if some women complained about not having enough sex with her boyfriend/husband, I wouldn’t think she is a rapist. Sex is an important part of relationships, and the lack of it can cause a lot of emotion.

  53. I give up. You cant argue with stupid. Fucking hell. (Oh NO! Cursing. Clutch those pearls!)

    Your daughter has a rape apologist and victim blaming moron for a father. And wasn’t it you who stated that women are treated differently by me because men rely on women for procreation? So that’s how you view your own daughter? A sex toy first, baby making machine second, and human last?

  54. And I QUOTE:

    As far as sexism. You can call it evo-psych bullshit, but a better term would be reality. I don’t have a uterus and it is extremely unlikely that I will grow one. I am totally dependent on women to procreate, something which I definitely enjoy doing. I imagine I am not alone. So, it is inevitable that I will treat women differently from men. This may be offensive, but that doesn’t make it any less accurate.

    So it’s perfectly okay in your world-view for men to view your daughter as a sex object and baby making machine before anything else? And then treat her differently because of it? All because she has a vagina and uterus?

  55. Also, sex drives may not match up for whatever reason. That’s fine. You do not have to stay in the relatinoship if you’re not happy. That still does not mean your partner has a moral obligation to fuck you.

    You do realize that’s why SPOUSAL RAPE was not made illegal until the 90′s, right? Because people thought (and many still do) that wives have a MORAL OBLIGATION to be always at the ready for their husbands, regardless of their personal feelings on the matter?

    You are contributing to rape culture. You have a daughter. Maybe you should consider your words and actions a little more.

  56. And since ~some sexism~ is totally okay in your world, I guess it’s totally okay for a man to oggle your daughter, and threat her differently than they would a man, since of course, she has a vagina and uterus and therefore her primary reason for existing is to please men and have babies. Isn’t that right? It’s what you said. You feel your daughter’s existance is for procreation first, human second. How nice of you!

  57. You say that as if sex and humanity are hopelessly separate causes.

  58. What does that even MEAN? That doesn’t mean jack shit.

    And so you DO think your daughter exists FIRST as a sex toy, second as a baby making machine, and THIRD as a human? Interesting that you didn’t deny that.

    What about women that are asexual? What about women that can’t have children? Don’t want to have children? What about trans* women? What about gay women?

    Your world-view is all about your heternormative dick.

    And the fact that you see your OWN DAUGHTER as a second class citizen is concerning as hell.

    • Obviously, MY daughter will cure AIDS and cancer before becoming president and then being the first person to land on Mars. But in a broader sense, I think anyone hopes that their child grows up to be a well-adjusted adult who isn’t supremely unsatisfied with her sex life, her relationships, and her life. All three are very much entwined, so I don’t really think ranking them is my job.

      As far as asexual/gay/trans/etc, hey, that’s fine as well. A man’s feeling towards a woman creates no responsibility on the woman at all. I’m more interested in how she feels as a person than exactly whom she is attracted to, though my hope is she isn’t attracted to individuals who cause her problems.

      Do I want to live in a world where a girl is treated differently because she is female? It’s the world in which I live. I’m treated differently because I am a man. Some things can be changed, and some can’t. Rewiring all people seems unlikely to happen.

  59. And are you going to make note of my comments about Spousal Rape, or are you just going to continue to ignore that?

    And do you REALLY want to live in a world where your daughter is treated differently all becuase she has a vagina? Do you REALLY want to live in a world where men view her as a sex toy before anything else? REALLY?

  60. Also I don’t specifically recall your comments about spousal rape. It occurs.

    • ARE YOU KIDDING ME? I talked about spousal rape SEVERAL times, in fact — I *just* mentioned it. You’re not reading anything I write, are you? You’re just repeating the same shit over and over again.

      And all you have is “it happens”???? You just brushed aside rape like it was no big deal? “Shrug. It happens.”

      WOW.

      Have you stopped to consider WHY spousal rape happens?!

      Let me say this again: Spousal rape wasn’t even made illegal in most of the US until the 90′s. It was legal to rape your wife until the 90′s. WHY? Because many people thought, and still think, that wives hve a MORAL OBLIGATION to be sexually available to their husbands, regardless of the woman’s feelings. This is why spousal rape wasn’t illegal UNTIL THE 90′S!!!

      This is the THIRD time, at least, I’ve brought this up.

      You are a rape apologist. A possible rapist. I’m done with you. Go somewhere else. You are NOT welcome here.

      • Geez, cut me some slack; I do have a newborn after all. Also, I am a man, so we know my ability to read and recall is limited. Anyways, I don’t disagree with you. The spousal exception to rape was there due to some sort of moral obligation that marriage supposedly implied. That being said, moral obligations can still exist despite the fact that we have had some poor expectations of them in the past.

  61. But in a broader sense, I think anyone hopes that their child grows up to be a well-adjusted adult who isn’t supremely unsatisfied with her sex life, her relationships, and her life.

    What does this have to do with anything? One can change their mind about desiring sex at certain moments in time and still have a perfectly healthy, well-adjusted sex life.

    As far as asexual/gay/trans/etc, hey, that’s fine as well. A man’s feeling towards a woman creates no responsibility on the woman at all.

    Except YOU STATED that women have a MORAL OBLIGATION to fuck, and if they revoke consent, they are breaking that moral obligation. You are contradicting yourself left and fucking right.

    Obligation also means:

    duty – responsibility – commitment – engagement – bond

    Do I want to live in a world where a girl is treated differently because she is female? It’s the world in which I live. I’m treated differently because I am a man. Some things can be changed, and some can’t. Rewiring all people seems unlikely to happen.

    That’s it. I’m done. You’re a fucking idiot. You have NO IDEA what rape culture is. You know nothing about feminism.

    And clearly you’re okay with your daughter being viewed as a sex toy before anything else. I asked you several times, and not once have you denied that.

    You are gross. A gross, gross, creepy fucking man, and I would NEVER want to be left alone with you. I worry about the world in which you are raising your daughter, where it is perfectly okay in your eyes that she be viewed as a sex object before anything else.

    I’m done. Officially. Go fuck off. No one likes you here. No one agrees with you. I suggest you stop commenting all together. Becuase you are WRONG on so many levels.

    You and others like you are a poison on this society.

    • I wouldn’t expect many answers from me involving my daughter as a sex toy. That’s a weird and useless question from anybody, especially someone I don’t know. People have different ideas about feminism. I think it starts with the idea that men and women are different. Men commit suicide at roughly a 4:1 rate to women and are incarcerated at a roughly 9:1 rate to women. Is that because society hates men? That’s not my view. So (to me) good feminism starts with understanding the differences between women and men and then remedying inequalities that have resulted from attempts to control or subjugate women.

      • YOU were the one that stated that you view women as potential baby-making machines (sex toys) before anything else, and therefore treat them differently. Your daughter will be a woman some day. It’s relevent.

        The fact that you can’t even CONSIDER how this subject effects your own daughter is WRONG.

        And clearly you have no idea what feminism is. Wow. You are a moron. Plain and simple. And you are ruled by your dick. Which is just sad. Life is more than just sex. Life is more than just your dick.

        • So…men who feel attraction to women are wrong? Men who act on attraction are wrong? Should people ignore every emotion they have, or just the ones that offend you?

          • lol what.

            never once did i imply the negative to these questions.

            be careful — your straw men may cause a nasty brush fire.

            holy shit. you’re just … really stupid.

            i’m done.

  62. Wow.

    Wow.

    You have a shitty justification for everything don’t you?

    And nope: rape apologists do not deserve leniancy. I certainly wasn’t given any when I was raped.

    Have a shitty fucking day.

  63. On 12/26, Edward Gemmer said:

    Clearly, you have the right to change your mind about a great many things. But take responsibility for your own actions.

    And later, he added:

    If you make other people feel like crap, it is your fault. You are not the victim. That doesn’t give them the right to rape you. It just makes you a shitty person who doesn’t care about the feelings of others. If you try and blame them for your own actions, you are not taking responsibility for your actions.

    In other words, when you change your mind and revoke consent, you need to take responsibility for making your partner upset. It doesn’t matter that you’re upset or that you don’t owe anyone an apology for revoking access to your body which you own and they do not. What matters is that you are a shitty person if you decide you no longer want to have sex, regardless of the reason.

    Bottom line: a man’s feelings towards a woman means she has a responsibility to be sensitive to his feelings, despite her own feelings about her own body.

    But 2 days later, Edward Gemmer said:

    A man’s feeling towards a woman creates no responsibility on the woman at all

    So which is it? Do you not see how you’re completely contradicting yourself?

    At this point, I’m going to have to assume you’re just a troll. I think you’re saying things to get a rise out of people. You’re not even being consistent in your rape apology bullshit.

  64. And to think, he has a daughter. Just sad.

    • He’ll teach her better manners than to tell a boy “no” after she’s already promised him her body. No take backs. It’s rude to force a guy to rape you.

  65. I just wanted to say that I admire all of you (non-rape apologists) who stick it out in threads like these. I don’t have the strength for it.

    • Mary,

      I’m wondering whether you’ve had the time to read all the posts here, especially mine and marilove’s. If so, do you agree with marilove’s assessment of me as a rape apologist and possible rapist?

      Honestly, this whole thing has been fairly taxing for me too – I feel like everything I’ve said has been grossly misrepresented over and over, then used to accuse me of being essentially an inhuman monster. All because I saw someone make what I thought was an incorrect statement about an extremely broad question, and decided to spend a few minutes explaining why I thought it (meaning of course the statement, not the person – don’t want to be accused of thinking a person is an “it”) was in error.

      I’ll end this post with a final thought: I’m assuming we’re all fans of skepticism here, and part of that means having one’s views critically examined. This can’t happen without people who disagree with you. But when one can’t even make a few comments about the nature of obligation without being burned at the metaphorical stake, that’s going to tend to drive away those who disagree, and eventually your views stop being challenged – and that can lead to dogma, and dare I say it – blind faith.

      • I’m not here to judge who wins arguments online. I didn’t call out anyone by name for a reason.

        Before I was a feminist and actually aware of rape culture, I defended “nice guys” and all of this sexual obligation shit. Then I woke up and the world looked different from the other side. Same as when I became a Skeptic.

        I don’t want to pick a fight, I just wanted to thank the people who stuck it out here. I hate internet arguments because they don’t end. In person, I don’t argue for more than an hour, and that’s if I feel like arguing at all because I would rather keep the peace.

        • Ok, thank you for replying.

      • dare I say it – blind faith.

        Seriously, shut the fuck up.

        You’re telling women who have been physically abused in relationships due to the whole “obligation” mentality guys have and you’re saying to them:

        “I give credit the line of thinking that led to your abuse”

        And you’re questioning WHY people are calling you a rape apologist? It’s because you are.

        Don’t give me this “you’re acting unskeptical” bullshit. That’s a big fat strawman.

  66. You have not been grossly misinterpreted. YOU STATED, very clearly, that women are (“sometimes”) obligated to have sex, even when they don’t want to. Women are under a MORAL obligation, no less, to have sex, even if they don’t want to.

    That is rape apology 101.

    You are a rape apologist.

    Don’t want to be called a rape apologist? STOP ACTING LIKE ONE.

  67. And, oh, boo-ooh! This discussion is taxing on YOU? A man who is under no threat of being raped? A man who hasn’t been raped? A man who isn’t under a “moral obligation” to have sex against his wishes? OH YOU MORE MAN! BOO OOH.

  68. And I gotta say, as a person who went through 2 years of abuse and rape because my boyfriend felt that I was MORALLY OBLIGATED to have sex with him no matter what I personally felt? Yeah, this has been taxing on me. You don’t even fucking know.

    But once again it’s all about you! You and your dick.

    Your lack of empathy is showing.

    SOMETIMES IT IS NOT ABOUT YOU AND YOUR DICK.

    • I was in a similar relationship before too. I thought something was wrong with me the whole time, but fortunately I got out and realized that the peoblem was not me. Why would someone want to “have sex” with someone who isn’t an enthusiastic partner, I don’t even know. Why would anyone want to treat their alleged partner like a mattress with a hole in it?

      This moral obligation BS upsets me too. That’s probably why I avoid these “discussions” of rape culture, so thanks for having the strength to go through this.

      • This is good therapy for me. :p I like a good e-fight. Especially when I know I am right.

        I am sure he thinks I am all riled up in real life but … eh. I have been on the Internet too long. Lol

  69. AND LOL, of course! “You’re skeptics! You must look at this critically! Your views must be questioned!”

    Did you forget this?

    “In fact? I see! A fact! Care to provide your sources to back that fact up?”

    It’s common sense, boogerface. If effective advice is offered, then a percentage of those who hear it will follow it, and a percentage of those will avoid becoming a victim.

    You stated a FACT yet were unable to provide proof of your fact.

    You “claim” it’s “common sense” but I directly and confidfenttly call bullshit on that. It is up to YOU to provide proof of your grand claims.

    But you can’t. And you won’t.

    Yet YOU’RE talking about skepticism? Are you fucking kidding me?

  70. But *I* actually know to do research before making claims. *I* know how to use the internet!!

    I don’t claim “common sense” without actually knowing if it’s common sense. I don’t ASSUME something is common sense. We know what it makes you when you ASSUME, don’t we?

    http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal-a/2012_12/news_flash_good_men_do_not_com041961.php

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/dec/18/nice-guys-commit-rape-conversation-unhelpful

    What is true, researchers have found, is that cultural opposition to rape myths makes men less likely to commit assault, and acceptance of those myths makes sexual assault more likely. In social groups where there is wide acceptance of rape myths – for example, the beliefs that acquaintance rape is a problem of communication or “mixed signals”, that rapists simply can’t control their sexual urges, that women often lie about rape, or that women invite rape upon themselves by their actions or manner of dressing – rape proclivity is higher. When men internalize rape myths, they are more likely to commit rape or see rape as more acceptable.

    When men perceive these rape myths as being widely-accepted social norms, their rape proclivity increases. When men believe their peers are using coercion to “get” sex, those men are more likely to engage in the same behaviors. But when men see that rape myths were challenged or not accepted, their rape proclivity decreases.

    In other words, challenging rape myths means less rape. But when writers, cultural figures, media-makers or individuals perpetuate the idea that rape is a grey area or that acquaintance rapists are “nice guys” who are just confused or that women somehow bring rape upon themselves, that enables rapists and feeds their propensity to rape.

    Here, the actual research, since clearly you’re too lazy to question your own assumptions:

    http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/1068316X.2010.492349#preview

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15005999

    And that’s just the motherfucking beginning.

    Don’t want to be considered a rape apologists? Then stop being a rape apologist!

    Want to be an ACTUAL Skeptic? Then don’t claim something is “common sense” when it is anything but.

    Your assumption was CLEARLY based off of your personal feelings on the matter — that women don’t have personal agency over their own bodies, and that they are stupid and must be told the “STRANGER DANGER!” lie from childhood until they die.

    You are a victim blaming rape apologist making shitty assumptions.

    You are not a Skeptic.

  71. Also, I love that a bunch of skeptics are talking about something so iffy and uncertain as “moral obligations”. Just dandy.

  72. I don’t know why I’m bothering, but:

    http://www.fit.edu/caps/documents/SexualCoercion_000.pdf
    http://www.afspc.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123222934
    http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1125&context=psychfacpub

    Now please go away and stop reopening old wounds because you can’t bear to be wrong.

    • Good information, read and absorbed, thanks!

Add Comment Register



Leave a Reply