Un-PC Men Are Attacked By Bitches for No Reason.

[compared2what?]

And, btw -- GM Citizen****, please come in and expound upon your views. I am not armed or dangerous or out to getcha. I believed what you wrote to be unjustified by any reality known to me, and would like to amend the assertion that it was hateful to this one, which is more truly representative of my meaning:

The statement you made is unjustifiable by any reality known to me. I'd like respectfully to ask for your justification of it. Because absent one, it is, unfortunately, very handy for use as a club wielded by hateful people who wish to break the heads of men and women both by any means available to them.

Which request I now respectfully repeat.

c2w, the more I read this posting over, the less I know which statement of mine you found so reprehensible in the posting from the other thread. It appears to me that perhaps you got angry at someone else's words and believed it was I that wrote them.

What I said over there was "you were not politically correct, don't ya know. You MUST always paint the female as the victim, without exception. That is unless it is an abusive lesbian relationship, in which case you should just disregard it."

Nothing specifically and overtly about rape in there at all.

Allow me to clarify. 8bit said something about rape to which I took exception. He objected. You replied that his error had been to deviate from a strictly politically correct standard, thus bringing down upon himself the wrath of we who insist that "you MUST always paint the female as the victim, without exception. That is unless it is an abusive lesbian relationship, in which case you should just disregard it."

Here is a handy reminder:

All a woman has to do is say "rape", and the burden of proof to prove innocence falls on the guy.

Okay. My resolve is not that strong. That's an absolutely unfucking true, hateful and stupid thing to say.

I strongly suggest that you do some reading and research that's thorough enough to be representative of the various typical failures of the justice system in rape cases. If you still want to maintain that all a woman has to do is say "rape" and the burden to prove innocence falls on the guy when you're done -- and by "done" I mean more deeply acquainted with the material than whatever degree of familiarity with the Kobe Bryant case you acquired in the course of being conscious in a media-saturated world while it was happening -- get back to me.

Did you simply chose to ignore everything else I said?

And I was giving the Bryant case as one example. I was saying how often times innocent get punished, and the guilty men go scott free.

Oh but 8bit, you were not politically correct, don't ya know. You MUST always paint the female as the victim, without exception. That is unless it is an abusive lesbian relationship, in which case you should just disregard it.

See how your comment addresses 8bit's comment, which was about rape, to which I objected, to which he objected? And how what you said was that his mistake was forgetting that "you MUST always paint the female as the victim, without exception. That is unless it is an abusive lesbian relationship, in which case you should just disregard it"?

That excludes the possibility that his mistake might have been saying something about rape that I might have objected to on grounds other than its failure to paint the female as a victim. Res ipsa loquitur, if you read it from start to finish.

I did not find it reprehensible. I found it unjustified by any reality known to me. Also, I wasn't agitated. I've been meaning to mention that.

[OP ED]

That is very nearly the stupidest quote on this thread. And that's saying a lot. Man, was that trip really necessary?

Argh. Yikes.

Indeed, even less funny than most of my off-color psuedo-jokes.

"very nearly" ???

[AhabsOtherLeg]

I don't think the free discussion of gender roles and their consequences should be allowed in a mixed-sex environment. And this thread is why.

The only real answer to an ideological gridlock of this kind is if all the guys go out for a beer and some rough-housing down at the auto-shop, while the women-folk wash up the dishes and whine endlessly on the phone.

Just my opinion. Which I already regret.

[OP ED]

AOL, (ha!)
I disagree. I think the progression of this thread will eventually come full circle. People will wear themselves out and civil discourse may yet emerge.

I have faith in people. Females and Males alike. This isn't politics, cooler heads may yet prevail!

(though your opinion is almost as bad as GMC's (ha! again!) stupid quote, for your sake, I hope you're kidding, and not just because you could get attacked for it, but also because if it wasn't a joke, it'd make you look ignorant.)

For the record, I hate all of you. You waste too much of my time, and yet I cannot stop. Its like taking crack during Socio class.

[compared2what?]

I am not trying to beat of on you. I am only asking you to justify what you write with something more substantial than something else you wrote and some scattershot, partially on-topic data.

To be crystal clear, the original topic question is: Are women so darn sensitive wrt issues of male-on-female rape because laws of political correctness insist upon it? Or might there be another reason for women to be alarmed and offended by the assertion that all they have to do is say "rape" and the burden of proof falls on the guy?

It's funny how these topics grow. My original contention in my reply to 8bit in the other thread, was that he was gonna get it, you know....tsk, tsk, in a funny way...because he did not conform to PC standards wrt to women being painted as victims.

From there it ballooned, or mushroomed (oh shit, is that a patriarchal word?) into rape and stuff. To me, the PC rules of referring to women are the topic, as it orginated from the other thread, but it's not my thread so I go along.

It was someone else that said the line about all women have to do is say "rape" and the burden of proof falls on the guy.

That is funny. Allow me once again to clarify. Your original contention was that he was gonna get it, you know....tsk, tsk, in a funny way...because he did not conform to PC standards wrt to women being painted as victims when he made the statement "All a woman has to do is say "rape", and the burden of proof to prove innocence falls on the guy."

This not only suggests, but flat-out states that the only basis on which the statement was being challenged was its failure to conform to PC standards.

That was not the basis on which I was challenging it. I was challenging it on the basis of its untruth, stupidity, and hatefulness. (8BIT, I AM SO SORRY.) As you could tell, since those were the reasons I gave.

[barracuda]

Ok, why was that a stupid quote?

No thanks. You're on your own with that one. Pass.

[compared2what?]

That is very nearly the stupidest quote on this thread. And that's saying a lot. Man, was that trip really necessary?

Argh. Yikes.

Ok, why was that a stupid quote? got anything of substance on it, or just a snide remark? C'mon....you been trained....use your training now...you can do it.

Was it a stupid quote simply because you might disagree with some of it? Perhaps you didn't like her reference to Pavlov? Or you're a dog-lover, and took offence?

Barracuda, I look forward to seeing you wrestle with this fiendishly clever challenge.

ON EDIT: DAMMIT. I look backward fondly on seeing you wrestle with this fiendishly clever challenge.

[GM Citizen]

See how your comment addresses 8bit's comment, which was about rape, to which I objected, to which he objected? And how what you said was that his mistake was forgetting that "you MUST always paint the female as the victim, without exception. That is unless it is an abusive lesbian relationship, in which case you should just disregard it"?

That excludes the possibility that his mistake might have been saying something about rape that I might have objected to on grounds other than its failure to paint the female as a victim. Res ipsa loquitur, if you read it from start to finish.

I did not find it reprehensible. I found it unjustified by any reality known to me. Also, I wasn't agitated. I've been meaning to mention that.

It seemed to me that you were jumping on him rather harshly. From my vantage point (outside of your head) I saw it as PC run amok, and chided 8bit accordingly, with a bit of humor.

When you look at the broad issue of rape, there are many facets of it, and as a result, many victims as well. You can have male victims, female victims, male false accusers (often male victims), female false accusers (often male victims).

But, we have been conditioned through nothing if not a concerted campaign of repetitiveness that rape equals female victim/male perpetrator. To think outside that predefined, and limiting box is to run afoul, in a major way, of PC. Those are my beliefs.

[GM Citizen]

Ok, why was that a stupid quote?

No thanks. You're on your own with that one. Pass.

So you have nothing to add. No clarification, just...nothing? Kinda sad really....I had hopes for you.

[GM Citizen]

AOL, (ha!)
I disagree. I think the progression of this thread will eventually come full circle. People will wear themselves out and civil discourse may yet emerge.

I have faith in people. Females and Males alike. This isn't politics, cooler heads may yet prevail!

(though your opinion is almost as bad as GMC's (ha! again!) stupid quote, for your sake, I hope you're kidding, and not just because you could get attacked for it, but also because if it wasn't a joke, it'd make you look ignorant.)

For the record, I hate all of you. You waste too much of my time, and yet I cannot stop. Its like taking crack during Socio class.

The quote is from a book by an author that did not buy into the patriarchy myth. Not my words, but if it makes you sleep better, then pin it on me as long as you like. It still won't make you right.

[bks]

GM Citizen: That argument, on its face, is so stupidly reductive as to be insulting.

I suggested Haraway because it's an original take on an old problem. It enlarges the range of possibilities in a way that, agree or disagree, is edifying. The argument you quote, on the other hand, you hear versions of your whole life from the misogynistic half-wits that populate certain corner bars during the mid-afternoon.

I thought of this thread today because I recently witnessed, in public, a man shouting curses at a female OTB teller that he had not shouted at her five minutes earlier during a transaction. He was shouting at her, that he had not been shouting then. The fucking idiot realized mid-shout that shouting was perhaps not the best way to make his case.

I looked at the face of the teller afterward. She looked not quite scared, but definitely uncomfortable and (I think I saw it) embarrassed that a large-ish man had been yelling at her. I looked around and saw no male security guards. I went up to the teller and asked her if she was OK, and if there were any male security guards in this facility to deal with assholes like that. She told me everything was OK, and I sensed she didn't want any further attention called to it. I said I would go over with one of the female security guards if they felt more comfortable confronting him that way.

Truthfully, I felt terrible. I had done nothing to help while he was shouting. The teller told me she really appreciated my walking up to her to see if she was OK afterward, but by that time the man had receded to the other room. Just before he did, though, just as he finished shouting, he caught me staring at him and said, "Fuckin broads, makin up shit, you know?" I just turned away and said nothing, like an asshole.

That man, I'm quite sure, believed he could talk to that teller in the way he did, because she was a woman. ANd he was right. He would not have talked to another man that way, 100%.

[GM Citizen]

That is very nearly the stupidest quote on this thread. And that's saying a lot. Man, was that trip really necessary?

Argh. Yikes.

Ok, why was that a stupid quote? got anything of substance on it, or just a snide remark? C'mon....you been trained....use your training now...you can do it.

Was it a stupid quote simply because you might disagree with some of it? Perhaps you didn't like her reference to Pavlov? Or you're a dog-lover, and took offence?

Barracuda, I look forward to seeing you wrestle with this fiendishly clever challenge.

ON EDIT: DAMMIT. I look backward fondly on seeing you wrestle with this fiendishly clever challenge.

barracuda has no fight left it appears. barracuda is down to posting pictures. no argument or debate of substance comes from barracuda, just the typical shoot the messenger tactic.

[OP ED]

AOL, (ha!)
I disagree. I think the progression of this thread will eventually come full circle. People will wear themselves out and civil discourse may yet emerge.

I have faith in people. Females and Males alike. This isn't politics, cooler heads may yet prevail!

(though your opinion is almost as bad as GMC's (ha! again!) stupid quote, for your sake, I hope you're kidding, and not just because you could get attacked for it, but also because if it wasn't a joke, it'd make you look ignorant.)

For the record, I hate all of you. You waste too much of my time, and yet I cannot stop. Its like taking crack during Socio class.

The quote is from a book by an author that did not buy into the patriarchy myth. Not my words, but if it makes you sleep better, then pin it on me as long as you like. It still won't make you right.

I wasn't pinning it on you, ole chap. My grammar was merely inferior in this context.

I didn't say you were dumb enough to say it, merely dumb enough to think it was relevant/appropriate to this discussion. (also to spend money on that book?)

Which is the nicest way I could think of to say that.

[GM Citizen]

GM Citizen: That argument, on its face, is so stupidly reductive as to be insulting.

I suggested Haraway because it's an original take on an old problem. It enlarges the range of possibilities in a way that, agree or disagree, is edifying. The argument you quote, on the other hand, you hear versions of your whole life from the misogynistic half-wits that populate certain corner bars during the mid-afternoon.

I thought of this thread today because I recently witnessed, in public, a man shouting curses at a female OTB teller that he had not shouted at her five minutes earlier during a transaction. He was shouting at her, that he had not been shouting then. The fucking idiot realized mid-shout that shouting was perhaps not the best way to make his case.

I looked at the face of the teller afterward. She looked not quite scared, but definitely uncomfortable and (I think I saw it) embarrassed that a large-ish man had been yelling at her. I looked around and saw no male security guards. I went up to the teller and asked her if she was OK, and if there were any male security guards in this facility to deal with assholes like that. She told me everything was OK, and I sensed she didn't want any further attention called to it. I said I would go over with one of the female security guards if they felt more comfortable confronting him that way.

Truthfully, I felt terrible. I had done nothing to help while he was shouting. The teller told me she really appreciated my walking up to her to see if she was OK afterward, but by that time the man had receded to the other room. Just before he did, though, just as he finished shouting, he caught me staring at him and said, "Fuckin broads, makin up shit, you know?" I just turned away and said nothing, like an asshole.

That man, I'm quite sure, believed he could talk to that teller in the way he did, because she was a woman. ANd he was right. He would not have talked to another man that way, 100%.

You might be right. He may not have talked to a male clerk in that fashion. But we must have an open mind to any given situation. Things just may not be as they appear. what if that man had mental issues? Perhaps Tourettes, or something. Maybe his hearing was shot. These are not excuses for his behaviour, but merely looking at all possibilities BEFORE we make up our minds on any specific event. We must take into account our own experiences and the biases they may have caused, and be certain to factor them out, before we judge.

You may have had the 100% correct read on that situation, but you may also have been totally wrong too.

[GM Citizen]

I wasn't pinning it on you, ole chap. My grammar was merely inferior in this context..

No problem. thanks for the clarification.

I didn't say you were dumb enough to say it, merely dumb enough to think it was relevant/appropriate to this discussion. (also to spend money on that book?)

Which is the nicest way I could think of to say that.

I believe that book is relevant to this topic completely.

The Patriarchy vs. The Manipulated Man

How can that not be relevant?