-
Check out the relaunch of our general collection, with classic designs and new ones by our very own Pissog!
-
Welcome to Smogon! Take a moment to read the Introduction to Smogon for a run-down on everything Smogon, and make sure you take some time to read the global rules.
Separating Genders
- Thread starter WaterBomb
- Start date
Last edited:
yeah, 'teach our sons not to rape' what a woke statement! especially when 90% of sexual violence is done by men, and btw mainstream news and psychology today (btw this was the site where I found my therapist, do you see a theme yet folks?) is now 'woke postings', I didn't know. Thanks for educating me in this anti-intellectual, resentment-fueled world view, I wouldn't want to set-off a school shooter or black piller by posting facts.
Anyone who is confused or angered by the slogan black lives matter is probably (definitely?) racist and probably would find a way to be offended by “stop killing black people”. I mean you could argue that it would make the racists more obvious and people in the middle more likely to see that, but honestly the “all lives matter, stop implying white lives don’t matter” response is such an obvious dog whistle the people who can’t see that are either really dumb or intentionally being obtuse in order to seem like they’re in the middle when they’re also just kind of racist.
To be more on topic with this thread. When it comes to gender neutral bathrooms are we talking like most current public restrooms with several stalls, or individual rooms? Because the individual room bathrooms are way better and as many of those that can exist should exist. That being said I’ve seen at least 2 places where they have individual rooms but each has a man and a woman sign which is dumb as fuck? Every time I go to those places if there’s a line in the men’s and not in the woman’s I’ll use the woman’s because I don’t understand gendering individual bathrooms.
As for the large bathrooms I think it’s a mixed bag, if they go to an all stall layout I would have an issue because my understanding is women hover when they use public restrooms so the seats would all be as dirty or dirtier than they are in men’s rooms. Also women (not all but literally 90% I’ve talked to about it) will not poop if someone else is in the restroom and try to hold it till someone flushes or the rooms empty (I can’t fathom this) so they probably wouldn’t like that? Idk more flushes, less time in an empty room. On the other hand if they made urinals like mini stalls and ended the travesty that are pee troughs (seriously why do those exist), those would improve my bathroom experience.
I don’t understand the other issues though, like if someone wants to sexually assault someone in the bathroom a little placard outside that says women isn’t going to stop that. That’s why the transgender bathroom laws are dumb as fuck, aside from the fact the transgender woman is far more likely to be sexually assaulted than to sexually assault someone, there’s no one checking IDs at the door so it’s completely ineffectual.
The real solution is bathrooms for individuals, I don’t think there is a problem with gender neutral bathrooms (if designed to increase bathroom privacy in general) but some people might be uncomfortable with them and there isn’t really a good reason to change existing bathrooms.
That is abaolutely false. I do not know the numbers in the US but in the Netherlands only 10% of all full professors is female and those numbers are even lower if you only consider natural sciences. In my own department (mathematics, which I guess you do not count under science in this definition) we have at most 20% females for phd students and under 10% for senior staff. We only have 1 female full professor. I also did a bachelor in physics and I had zero female professors there. Sure there will be exceptions but they are just that, exceptions.
Edit: I looked it up since I was curious. In the USA the percentage is higher than I expected (more or less 42%) but still way below "pretty evenly split". The percentages in other countries including the EU and Japan are lower. Moreover this does not include stuff like wage gaps and it being much harder for women to get more important positions like full professorships.
Last edited:
is there anyone who actually believes that teach men not to rape is a secret code for teach some men not to rape and not some stupid tactic they say to give them plausible deniability to be as bigoted as possible without recourse
several other people in this thread were defending the usage of the phrase and i was talking in direct reply to them
???
You ask for examples of the phrase being used. I'm giving then to you. People are using it. It's a damn hashtag. Nowhere am I slandering mainstream psych websites.
Last edited:
it;s kinda funny how this whole topic has devolved into a bunch of guys whining that they kinda feel attacked by a statement that is obvious as to what it means if you aren't intentially trying to be a disengenous fucking shit. then again, I guess thats the core demographic of the website, so shouldn't be surprised
Or maybe people think it's a phrase that accomplishes nothing, not whining about feeling attacked. Do police sit down and say "ah, if only this guy KNEW he was raping this woman, then he wouldn't have done it". Rapists are the problem, not men. What hearts and minds are changed by learning that consent is like a cup of tea?
And seriously, why do you continue to hop from thread to thread, crusading against rightwing posters with your line-skating attitude? Your ad hominem to post ratio is enormous. Chill out.
It's purely an issue of how much do we hold the white mans hand and rub lotion on his thin skin to keep him comfortable through the scary times.
It's really hard not to read posts talking about how "libs increase racial tension in whites by talking about racial issues" as "maybe massa will let you progress if you kept him happy first"
And I wouldn't talk about how libs can't phrase things when conservatives run around calling themselves incels
mfw told not to rape women despite never having meaningful contact with one in the first place 
atomicllamas and you others, you missed the point of rodan's post, which is that "stop killing black people" is the BLM equivalent of "teach men not to rape." "Black Lives Matter" only offends to the point that racially sensitive people don't understand the implicit "too" at the end of that phrase. That is to say the number of recent high-profile cases of black dudes being slain by overeager cops is tragically high. It's not outright calling anybody out and blaming them for those cases, it's raising awareness about what happened and calling for people to support change that helps protect future would-be victims of this kind of tragedy. "Teach men not to rape" is basically calling half the world's population rapists. BOY, I WONDER WHY THE 99%+ OF MEN WHO AREN'T RAPISTS MIGHT BE OFFENDED.
It's the equivalent of saying stop killing black people. Most people don't kill anybody. Most men don't rape anybody. Implying all men are rapists doesn't effectively getting your message across, it just offends the vast majority of men who are completely innocent and makes them want to tune you out at best, if not push back.
All numbers from here: [ http://sites.nationalacademies.org/pga/cwsem/PGA_049131 ] U.S. numbers? *shrug* Either way.
Women have made up roughly 55% of Bachelor+ degree earners every year in which data is available, and the only particular "science" field in which they make up under 40% of the population is (VERY PREDICTABLY) computer science, which leads to what we'd normally call "Technology" rather than "Science" positions. Factor out CS and women make up 53% of natural science graduates, not to mention over 60% of behavioral science graduates. Per employment numbers instead, after factoring out CS (i.e. Technology) and Math from the science figures, women graduates make up 48% of the industry, not to mention a ridiculous 70% of "Health occupations" (which I'm not sure why aren't officially classified as science jobs but whatever).
Anecdotally, I haven't been in a lab job yet where a majority of my co-workers weren't women and, though there's obviously no hard proof to the matter, I wholeheartedly believe that I've been passed over for better opportunities on account of being male (nevermind white), based on the false notion that women in science need to be propped up.
In contrast, Technology and Engineering are split at like 80/20 in favor of men. Women chill at like 45%ish in Math at least. The issue is that society doesn't actually care about the "S" and "M" parts of STEM. When certain people are inclined to complain about the gender imbalance in STEM, they almost invariably point to the bro culture of Silicon Valley and the big tech giants (Google, Apple, etc.) while conveniently forgetting that women actually make up a majority of (natural and behavioral) scientists. Or they'll cite isolated incidents where women were discriminated against, like the U.S. Forest Service stuff that's been hot news recently (even though most USFS agents, especially firefighters, aren't actually scientists), and generalize that as being indicative of a problem across all sciences.
atomicllamas and you others, you missed the point of rodan's post, which is that "stop killing black people" is the BLM equivalent of "teach men not to rape." "Black Lives Matter" only offends to the point that racially sensitive people don't understand the implicit "too" at the end of that phrase. That is to say the number of recent high-profile cases of black dudes being slain by overeager cops is tragically high. It's not outright calling anybody out and blaming them for those cases, it's raising awareness about what happened and calling for people to support change that helps protect future would-be victims of this kind of tragedy. "Teach men not to rape" is basically calling half the world's population rapists. BOY, I WONDER WHY THE 99%+ OF MEN WHO AREN'T RAPISTS MIGHT BE OFFENDED.
It's the equivalent of saying stop killing black people. Most people don't kill anybody. Most men don't rape anybody. Implying all men are rapists doesn't effectively getting your message across, it just offends the vast majority of men who are completely innocent and makes them want to tune you out at best, if not push back.
Professors are but a tiny portion of the totality of science professions, you ninny. I personally consider 40/60 a fairly reasonable split at any rate, you've gotta have some range of error around the 50/50 ideal.
All numbers from here: [ http://sites.nationalacademies.org/pga/cwsem/PGA_049131 ] U.S. numbers? *shrug* Either way.
Women have made up roughly 55% of Bachelor+ degree earners every year in which data is available, and the only particular "science" field in which they make up under 40% of the population is (VERY PREDICTABLY) computer science, which leads to what we'd normally call "Technology" rather than "Science" positions. Factor out CS and women make up 53% of natural science graduates, not to mention over 60% of behavioral science graduates. Per employment numbers instead, after factoring out CS (i.e. Technology) and Math from the science figures, women graduates make up 48% of the industry, not to mention a ridiculous 70% of "Health occupations" (which I'm not sure why aren't officially classified as science jobs but whatever).
Anecdotally, I haven't been in a lab job yet where a majority of my co-workers weren't women and, though there's obviously no hard proof to the matter, I wholeheartedly believe that I've been passed over for better opportunities on account of being male (nevermind white), based on the false notion that women in science need to be propped up.
In contrast, Technology and Engineering are split at like 80/20 in favor of men. Women chill at like 45%ish in Math at least. The issue is that society doesn't actually care about the "S" and "M" parts of STEM. When certain people are inclined to complain about the gender imbalance in STEM, they almost invariably point to the bro culture of Silicon Valley and the big tech giants (Google, Apple, etc.) while conveniently forgetting that women actually make up a majority of (natural and behavioral) scientists. Or they'll cite isolated incidents where women were discriminated against, like the U.S. Forest Service stuff that's been hot news recently (even though most USFS agents, especially firefighters, aren't actually scientists), and generalize that as being indicative of a problem across all sciences.
do you intend to post like this after youve move to thailand to enjoy the privilege afforded you there by your western-nation wealth and whiteness as well
As long as you said it
I think a big issue muddling all this is young men who have never even had blue balls thinking they couldn't be rapists.
One of my first sexual experiences was with a girl that I was having sex with, then she wanted to stop. As a man, you can feel like you're between a rock and a hard place AT BEST. At worst, men think that they have consent because they had it already, and they'll argue this all the way to court. And thats just one of many situations where "it couldn't hurt" compells a man to rape. "This can't really be rape, right?" The devil on his shoulder says with a grin. This is most rapists, not premeditated stalking bag over head types. Sexual frustration plus opportunity equals unplanned rape (note women don't have copious amounts of either) unless you well and truly knew better.
But for every thread like this where attempts to talk about it are bogged down by semantics arguments, there are threads on porn and "game" forums that tell men that scenarios like these aren't rape.
yeah so as we can see most of the time that hash tag is being used in response to an instance when someone blamed a woman for causing her rape. in these instances women are taught that it is their fault that men rape them, so I reckon the response comes in to push back against that way of thinking, that we have to warn women, for example, to watch their drinks when they go out, rather than having difficult conversations with men.
change the goal posts however much you want, tag screen shots of searches of whatever else you can dig up, prop up any number of strawmen, but this is pretty obvious stuff so it's not much effort for me to keep going all day, every mod that wants to take a shot at explaining why the hashtag 'teach men not to rape' is inappropriate, ineffective, and or bigoted, feel free.
next batch of searches i guess, you still gotta find the one that makes it seem like people using the hashtag are all bigots against men, but maybe you should take the word of the expert at bigotry, TIK, instead of me.
The more you expand the definition of rape the more you also have to admit that not all "rape" is created equal. Inflating the statistics by crying rape at every questionable situation that nobody remembers every little detail about well after the fact when pressed for an answer by some shitty survey only makes logical people roll their eyes and sows seeds of resentment in men who feel wrongly attacked. (And the broader the definition, the more women you accuse of inadvertently raping men as well BUT NOBODY WITH AN AGENDA WILL ADMIT TO THAT WILL THEY)
I'll even use your linked numbers c/o RAINN: "13% of women who are raped attempt suicide." According to the AFSP, their best estimate of U.S. adult women who have attempt suicide, based on data from the CDC, is roughly 0.7mil out of 130 million. RAINN says that their estimate of female rape victims as of 1998 is 17.7 million, also based on CDC data, so if 13% of those women attempt suicide that's... 2.3 million? That's more than three times higher. Even if "sexual violence has fallen by half in the last 20 years" per RAINN's front page and we assume rape attempts are reduced in kind, that's still over 50% more, not even factoring in that suicide rates have also climbed over the years.
... At this point, I'm just going to stop and throw my hands up at how ridiculously broad and imprecise these damn numbers are. It's obviously not easy to pin down dubious maybe-rape-maybe-not situations (or suicide for that matter... if you wanna talk a gender gap, let's discuss how nearly 80% of suicides are men), which is precisely why I think the man-hating corner of the Internet needs to slow their roll a little bit. Implicating upwards of 1/3 of all men as prepetrators of rape, at the high end of estimates, doesn't pass the sniff test at all. That's "how do men and women even have relationships" levels of BS.
I can maybe buy 1/6, but that still comes with the caveat that most "rapes" are not of the particularly traumatizing kind, which leads me to pointing back at WaterBomb's post. Whether it's putting sex on a pedestal, toxic masculinity, whatever buzzwords or phrases you wanna call it, it's a very broad societal problem. Sex is glorified as sort of the end-all of leisurely pleasure. Virgin shaming is still an extremely acceptable target of derision, especially for men. That's why "incels" exist. Both young men and women everywhere get bombarded by their family and peers if they don't marry or have children by a certain age, though again I think men have it harder in this regard since they're still largely expected to be the active pursuant in heterosexual romance. And it's only gotten harder for introverts to socialize in the past couple decades, as interfacing through technology has increasingly replaced personal face-to-face interactions.
Putting yourself out there has never been more emotionally nerve-wracking in an era where people are free to judge you behind a veil of anonymity and never face any consequences, and this disproportionately affects men because they're the ones expected to expose themselves while women are given the luxury of being able to sit back and watch men scratch and scramble for their attention. Throw on top of that the expectation for men to suppress their emotions, it's not difficult to see how things have gotten to be as they are.
Anyway, I don't know where the hell I'm going with all this anymore. I'm not sure the above problem can actually be solved, or well it can theoretically but not in a manner that'll ever realistically happen. I regret wasting my time looking shit up and writing all this, but since I've already done so I might as well click the post button.
mfw a guy who believes an eroge is the greatest work of literature in existence dumps on eroge
I'll even use your linked numbers c/o RAINN: "13% of women who are raped attempt suicide." According to the AFSP, their best estimate of U.S. adult women who have attempt suicide, based on data from the CDC, is roughly 0.7mil out of 130 million. RAINN says that their estimate of female rape victims as of 1998 is 17.7 million, also based on CDC data, so if 13% of those women attempt suicide that's... 2.3 million? That's more than three times higher. Even if "sexual violence has fallen by half in the last 20 years" per RAINN's front page and we assume rape attempts are reduced in kind, that's still over 50% more, not even factoring in that suicide rates have also climbed over the years.
... At this point, I'm just going to stop and throw my hands up at how ridiculously broad and imprecise these damn numbers are. It's obviously not easy to pin down dubious maybe-rape-maybe-not situations (or suicide for that matter... if you wanna talk a gender gap, let's discuss how nearly 80% of suicides are men), which is precisely why I think the man-hating corner of the Internet needs to slow their roll a little bit. Implicating upwards of 1/3 of all men as prepetrators of rape, at the high end of estimates, doesn't pass the sniff test at all. That's "how do men and women even have relationships" levels of BS.
I can maybe buy 1/6, but that still comes with the caveat that most "rapes" are not of the particularly traumatizing kind, which leads me to pointing back at WaterBomb's post. Whether it's putting sex on a pedestal, toxic masculinity, whatever buzzwords or phrases you wanna call it, it's a very broad societal problem. Sex is glorified as sort of the end-all of leisurely pleasure. Virgin shaming is still an extremely acceptable target of derision, especially for men. That's why "incels" exist. Both young men and women everywhere get bombarded by their family and peers if they don't marry or have children by a certain age, though again I think men have it harder in this regard since they're still largely expected to be the active pursuant in heterosexual romance. And it's only gotten harder for introverts to socialize in the past couple decades, as interfacing through technology has increasingly replaced personal face-to-face interactions.
Putting yourself out there has never been more emotionally nerve-wracking in an era where people are free to judge you behind a veil of anonymity and never face any consequences, and this disproportionately affects men because they're the ones expected to expose themselves while women are given the luxury of being able to sit back and watch men scratch and scramble for their attention. Throw on top of that the expectation for men to suppress their emotions, it's not difficult to see how things have gotten to be as they are.
Anyway, I don't know where the hell I'm going with all this anymore. I'm not sure the above problem can actually be solved, or well it can theoretically but not in a manner that'll ever realistically happen. I regret wasting my time looking shit up and writing all this, but since I've already done so I might as well click the post button.
mfw a guy who believes an eroge is the greatest work of literature in existence dumps on erogeIt's worth mentioning that helping women avoid situations where bad things are more likely to happen to them isn't necessarily equivalent to blaming them for the bad things that do happen to them.
Last edited:
Is that really a fair thing to say tho? If anything, living in a foreign country where one's faced daily with the vivid difference of class/privilege compared to one's own, more comfortable homeland and personal background should lead one to better see through the frailties and foibles of those of his or her's own social and class profile, rather than perch them into pundits' ivory towers.
Last edited:
I mean if you want people to know what bigotry looks like youd call in the expert wouldnt you
Women are so strong and independent that we need to bend over backwards to grant them extra protection.
Ofcourse even though the men get less value they still pay the same. Women just need a better deal because society hates women. This reminds me of the good old days when women were seen as worthless and had no rights. Back then they had this ship called the Titanic and every man was allowed to go for a swim but women had to wait on boring small boats. What a sexism. If that does not prove women were hated then nothing will.
Ofcourse even though the men get less value they still pay the same. Women just need a better deal because society hates women. This reminds me of the good old days when women were seen as worthless and had no rights. Back then they had this ship called the Titanic and every man was allowed to go for a swim but women had to wait on boring small boats. What a sexism. If that does not prove women were hated then nothing will.
Haha did you even see Titanic?
To quote the unofficial Titanic wiki:
Caledon Nathan Hockley, often shortened to Cal, (1882-1929) was Rose's fiancé and the main antagonist of the film Titanic. He was supposed to have married 17 year old socialite Rose DeWitt Bukater in an arranged ceremony when they arrived in Philadelphia, yet her hatred for him due to his sociopathic, misogynistic ways, and later her unexpected romance with Jack Dawson, kept them from forming an intimate bond.
17 year old, arranged marriage, sociopath misogynist. Yeah, women had it really good on the Titanic.
70.8% of children murdered by one parent are murdered by their mothers. Teach our daughters not to murder young children? "Sweetie, when you're older, make sure you don't kill your kid, mmmkay?"
What people don't seem to understand is that children are extremely sensitive to any form of bias. They pick up on it immediately and it can be incredibly damaging to them and their development. By saying things like "don't hit girls" to boys instead of teaching everybody gender-neutral general principals, you are instilling the idea in their minds that males and females should be treated differently, and that's a disasterous foundation to try to build an egalitarian society upon.
nice try, but one in five children arent murdered by their parents, where as one in three to one in six women are raped by a man. i agree with teaching the childrens gender neutral principles, in w.e vague sense, but in most of the world that is failed on for most children before (and after) they get to a public classroom. children are as you said extremely sensitive to bias, and a significant bias is that which consists in prioritizing men over women or masculine achievement over feminine. Or even, that prioritizes male achievement over the safety of women, in the case of your post. Really it's damaging to be treated differently? Thanks for the tip, dude, but sexual assault is no cake walk either. That perspective is being missed over and over again by scarily and sadly nearly identical posts by men itt.