This will be my last post in this thread.
obliguhl said:
As men who have never had to experience what it means to be a woman in this society, our "opinion" on the matter doesn't really count for much.
...and women do not know what problems men are suffering from. Since male and female problems are sometimes interrelated, it makes sense to promote mutual understanding.
Acknowledging one injustice does not negate all others. Naming the fact that women face certain realities in the world doesn't imply that men don't face their own set of struggles. On top of that, most feminists I know would argue that most of the problems men deal with are a result of the same attitudes, beliefs, and institutions that impact women. The cultural assumption that men have to act a certain way is detrimental not just to women but to men who wont/cant fit this mold. The unrealistic expectations placed on men to be primary breadwinners, to be "protectors", etc... is a feminist issue.
In North America, only about 5% of victims of sexual assault report to the police because survivors are (reasonably) afraid they will not be believed, or that their abuser will become more violent.
Ok, but who is at fault here? If you want injustice to get noticed, you have to bring it to someones attention.
Well, look at the next statistic. The odds are not exactly in their favor. When you go to the police to report a sexual assault, there is only a 3% chance it will actually be dealt with as a crime, and a
.3% chance that anything will be done about it. Reporting abuse puts survivors in vulnerable positions, and if nothing comes out of it there can be serious social and physical repercussions.
Out of every 1,000 sexual assaults, about 30 are processed as a crime--and 3 result in conviction.
Then, it would be interesting to know what actually counts as sexual assault. Also, these kinds of actions are hard to prove and the results for men are extreme should they be persecuted for false reasons. So that isn't a sign of rape culture in my opinion, just of good reasoning and fairness.
That statistic defined sexual assault as any kind of sexual contact in which the victim was unable to consent (eg they were drugged or manipulated), forced intercourse, and/or unwanted sexual touching.
Are men sometimes falsely accused of sexual assault? Absolutely, and it's a terrible thing. But that happens at a much lower rate than men who are justly accused of sexual assault who are not held accountable at all. It's not fair or reasonable to automatically assume a woman is lying, the data simply doesn't support it. I don't want to open a whole other can of worms, but I think your point brings up issues surrounding how we deal w/ criminal justice in general--which, if you wanted to get into the nitty-gritty of it, is also a feminist issue (see intersectional theory).
In 99% of reported cases involving sexual assault, the perpetrator is male
Do you believe most men are willing to risk their maleness by reporting sexual crimes against themselves? They probably should if they care though....just another way to look at these statistics.
I see your point, but I think it's naive to assume women sexually assault men as frequently as men do it to women. But I'll bite, and let's pretend the rates are equal. Even in that case, the fact that men would be afraid to report this because of their fragile sense of masculinity is a feminist issue.
"Not buying it" is part of this culture.
No, it is disagreement, which is the cornerstone of free speech and debate culture.
I'm all for skepticism and healthy debate. But some things are not debatable. Debate for its own sake, particularly when the well-being of other people is at stake, isn't productive. I'm not going to patiently debate w/ someone who believes the earth is flat when we damn well know that it's not. I'm not going to debate that climate change is actually happening with someone when I could be spending my time trying to address the problem. Obviously it's important to explain your perspective, but when people have been doing it for years and the data is publicly available, there's a point where folks lose their patience. I've attached a picture to the end of this post which sums up my opinion on "debate culture" when it comes to social issues. I've shared it here before, but it's still relevant.
Feminism is all about the freedom to choose. I know plenty of feminist women who enjoy conventional gender roles for themselves. They are feminist because they acknowledge that simply because that's the default in our society, not every woman wants that.
That is something i can agree with.
Congrats, you're a feminist! How does it feel? :thumb_up:
Furthermore, in 2014 in the US women were collectively paid only 79% of what men were paid for doing the same work
To my knowledge, the "gender pay gap" studies do NOT factor in different work choices, and work hours logged. I this regard, it makes sense to assume that women are paid less if they are taking up lower paid jobs or working less because of children for instance. Please provide a source for your claims. Correlation does not imply causation.
From wikipedia:
In the United States, the gender pay gap is measured as the ratio of female to male median yearly earnings among full-time, year-round (FTYR) workers...The raw wage gap data shows that a woman would earn roughly 73.7% to 77% of what a man would earn over their lifetime. However, when controllable variables are accounted for, such as job position, total hours worked, number of children, and the frequency at which unpaid leave is taken, in addition to other factors, a U.S. Department of Labor study, conducted by the CONSAD Research Group, found in 2008 that the gap can be brought down from 23% to between 4.8% and 7.1%
So yes, the gap is significantly smaller when you factor those things in. But that said,
this study (2007) and
this study, which I admit is quite dated but I believe is still relevant, (among countless others) show that women and mothers are much less likely to be hired for the same job as men even when their applications are identical.
As for the rest of the statistics:
National Sexual Violence Resource Center, Statistics Canada
People are allowed to be angry at injustice.
People aare allowed to do anything, they just have to live with the consequences. In this case, not being heard in this matter because anger does not further a good debate.
If you accidentally and unknowingly step on my foot, I'm going to do my best to inform you of what happened. If your response is, "Prove it. Even if I did I'm sure it didn't hurt
that bad," I'm going to get angry. But lets say I let it go that one time. But it keeps happening, and whenever it does I do my best to point it out to you. If you genuinely don't see what you're doing wrong, fine--I can concede that. But at some point your response should be, "I'm sorry I keep hurting you. I will make an effort to pay more attention to what I'm doing so as to prevent this from happening in the future."
Feminists don't want more debate, and they don't have to keep proving themselves so that men will validate their experiences. History shows that confrontation is the most effective way to overcome injustice. The whole point of "3rd wave feminism" (or any other social movement) is to make people uncomfortable. When people are continuously pushed outside of their comfort zone, they want it to stop, and they'll eventually change their behavior. You could say that this doesn't work and only alienates people, but history says otherwise--and here you and I are having a real conversation, as men, about our relationship w/ women. Would that be happening if the OP hadn't been pushed out of their comfort zone?
If you don't think that patriarchy exists, OK. We all have to start somewhere. But as men, we can be critical thinkers and do some self-reflection when women tell us that our behavior is harmful. You don't have to see it right away. But reasonable people, when told they are doing something wrong, do their best to avoid that behavior even if they don't always understand why. Over time you might start to notice patterns you hadn't before, and you may even grow from it. It's not going to kill you, I promise.
Godsmacker said:
I'm just gon' follow suit, leave this thread in the dust to die and get back to the things in life which actually matter (Freud, drugs, orgo, & all that jazz).
Apathy is not an attractive trait, my friend. Simply because you don't feel that you are directly impacted by something doesn't mean that it isn't important. I would argue that the well-being of women (or any person) is more important than your desire to get high. But maybe I'm missing something.